A History Of Cynicism

THE BOOK WAS
DRENCHED

60354 >m

A HISTORY OF CYNICISM

A HISTORY

OF

CYNICISM

From Diogenes to the 6 th Century A.D.

by
DONALD R. DUDLEY

Fellow of St. John's College, Cambridge
Henty Fellow at Yale University

METHUEN & CO. LTD. LONDON
36 Essex Street, Strand, W.C.2

First published in 1937

PRINTED IN GREAT BRITAIN

PREFACE

THE research of which this book is the outcome was mainly
carried out at St. John's College, Cambridge, Yale University,
and Edinburgh University. In the help so generously given
to my work I have been no less fortunate than in the scenes
in which it was pursued. I am much indebted for criticism
and advice to Professor M. Rostovtseff and Professor E. R.
Goodonough of Yale, to Professor A. E. Taylor of Edinburgh,
to Professor F. M. Cornford of Cambridge, to Professor J. L.
Stocks of Liverpool, and to Dr. W. H. Semple of Reading.
I should also like to thank the electors of the Henry Fund for
enabling me to visit the United States, and the College Council
of St. John's for electing me to a Research Fellowship. Finally,
to* the unfailing interest, advice and encouragement of Mr.
M. P. Charlesworth of St. John's I owe an especial debt
which I can hardly hope to repay.

These acknowledgements do not exhaust the list of my
obligations ; but I hope that other kindnesses have been
acknowledged either in the text or privately.

D. R. D.

CAMBRIDGE

March,

CONTENTS

CHAP. PAGE

INTRODUCTION ix

I ANTISTHENES. NO DIRECT CONNEXION WITH CYNICS.

HIS ETHICS I

II DIOGENES AND HIS ASSOCIATES 17

(a) DIOGENES IN LITERARY TRADITIONLIFE

THOUGHT

(b) ONESICRATUS 39

(c) MONIMUS 40

(d) CRATES LIFE WRITINGS CRATES AND HIPPARCHIA 42

III 9 CYNICISM IN THE THIRD CENTURY B.C. 59

(a) BION 62

(b) MENIPPUS 69

(c) CERCIDAS 74

(d) TELES 84

(e) CYNIC EDUCATIONAL THEORY, ETC. 87

IV CYNICISM AND THE PHILOSOPHICAL SCHOOLS IN THE

THIRD CENTURY 95

(a) THE MEGARIANS 95

(b) ZENO 96

(c) ARISTON IOO

(d) HEDONISTS IO3

(e) EPICUREANS I O6
(/) TIMON 107

V CYNIC INFLUENCE ON HELLENISTIC LITERATURE IIO
VI CYNICISM IN THE SECOND AND FIRST CENTURIES B.C. 117

VII DEMETRIUS. THE * PHILOSOPHIC OPPOSITION ' IN

THE FIRST CENTURY A.D. 125
vii

viii A HISTORY OF CYNICISM

CHAP. PAGf

VIII CYNICISM IN THE SECOND CENTURY A.D. 143

(a) GENERAL CHARACTER 143

(b) DIG CHRYSOSTOM 148

(c) DEMONAX 158

(d) OENOMAUS l62

(e) PEREGRINUS 170

(/) MINOR FIGURES 1 82

IX CYNICISM AND THE PHILOSOPHIC SCHOOLS IN THE

FIRST AND SECOND CENTURIES A.D. 1 86

(a) PHILO

(b) CYNICS AND STOICS OF THE ROMAN EMPIRE

(c) FAVORINUS

(d) MAXIMUS

X CYNICISM FROM THE THIRD TO THE SIXTH CENTURIES

A.D. <2,Q2

(a) JULIAN AND THE CYNICS

(b) MAXIMUS

(c) ASTERIUS

(d) SALLUSTIUS

EPILOGUE 209

APPENDICES 215

INDEX 223

INTRODUCTION

THE Emperor Julian, speaking of the Cynic philosophy, says
that ' it has been practised in all ages ... it does not need
any special study, one need only hearken to the god of Delphi
when he enjoins the precepts " know thyself " and " alter the
currency " '. In claiming the Delphic god as the founder of
Cynicism Julian is guilty of an obvious anachronism ; for
Cynicism cannot be shown to antedate Diogenes of Sinope.
But from the fourth century B.C. Cynicism endured to the
last days of the ancient world ; Cynics were common in the
days of Augustine ; they may have been known in the Empire
of Byzantium. Long life is not of itself a criterion of worth ;
and^it cannot be denied that Cynicism survived when much
of immeasurably greater intellectual value perished. To the
student of ancient philosophy there is in Cynicism scarcely
more than a rudimentary and debased version of the ethics of
Socrates, which exaggerates his austerity to a fanatic asceticism,
hardens his irony to sardonic laughter at the follies of man-
kind, and affords no parallel to his genuine love of knowledge.
Well might Plato have said of the first and greatest Cynic,
* That man is Socrates gone mad.'

But to the student of social history, and of ancient thought
as distinct from philosophy, there is much of interest in
Cynicism. The Cynics are the most characteristically Greek
expression of that view of the World as Vanity Fair, and
the consequent rejection of all current values, and the desire
to revert to a life based on the minimum of demands. It
is a phenomenon to be found at several stages of Western
civilization ; at different periods the moving causes have been
political or economic injustice, religious enthusiasm, or re-
action from an over-developed urban civilization. * Vanity
of Vanities, saith the preacher, all is Vanity * the author of
Ecclesiastes was, like the Cynics, a product of the Hellenistic
age, a time when old standards had been discarded, and the
individual was left to the mercy of capricious but irresistible

x A HISTORY OF CYNICISM

forces. The Cynics were missionaries, and their message was/
that life could be lived on any terms the age could impose.
It is particularly easy for the modern observer to see only
the grotesque aspect of Cynicism, and to miss its real sig-
nificance. This is partly due to the fact that Cynicism is
usually presented to us in histories of Greek philosophy, where
it forms an interlude of semi-comic relief between Socrates and
Plato, or between Plato and the Stoics. But a most important
reason is that the Cynics represented a standard with which
we are unfamiliar that of the minimum. Through long
exposure to statistics, we can readily grasp any conception
that involves a norm the cost of living, the real wage of
the working man, and so on but in the modern world no
one voluntarily lives, as did the Cynics, at subsistence level.
Our civilization admittedly has the disadvantage that it may
be completely shattered by war : but in other respects we
have far greater security than was known to the Hellenistic
world. Slavery, in particular, is so remote from us that it is
hard to comprehend how real a terror it was to the Greeks
of that period. Yet one has only to consider how powerful
were the pirates in the Mediterranean until their suppression
by Pompeius, to see that any traveller by ship was running a
real risk of being captured and sold into slavery. Exile has
only recently been the lot of thousands of citizens of European
States ; in the Hellenistic world it existed not only as a
common form of punishment, but also as one of the normal
risks attendant on a high position in politics. Again, during
this period several cities were completely destroyed, as Thebes
by Alexander, Lebedos and Kolophon by Lysimachus, and
most notable of all such catastrophes in the Greek world,
Corinth by the Romans.

Conditions in the Roman Empire bore a sufficiently close
resemblance to those of the Hellenistic age that the Cynic
mission was again in demand. Exile, slavery, loss of home
and possessions, are the frequent burthen of the Cynic diatribe ;
if their thought on these subjects seems commonplace, it
should not be forgotten that they were dealing with what
their audience felt as very real terrors, and that they were
performing a valuable service in showing that even these could
be surmounted.

The present account tells the history of Cynicism from

INTRODUCTION xi

^e time of Diogenes to the last years of the Roman Empire
in the West. No continuous account is available of later date
than that of Zeller, since when a good deal of new material
has accumulated, both from the discovery of papyri and in
the normal course of research. I have tried to embody the
lessons of this new material in my narrative ; which, however,
claims to be rather more than a cento of the conclusions of
other scholars. Its central theme is that the traditional view
of Cynicism as a minor Socratic school, founded by Antis-
thenes, must be abandoned. Antisthenes had no direct con-
tact with the Cynics, who never formed a school of philosophy
at all, being intolerant of organization and impatient of theory.
I have argued that the traditional view has been established by
two interested parties Alexandrian writers of Successions of
Philosophers and the Stoics. The former wished to trace all
philosophical genealogies back to Socrates wherever possible ;
the latter, desirous of showing themselves as the true heirs
of Socrates, made great play with the connexion of their
founder Zeno with the Cynic Crates, and turned Diogenes
into*a Stoic saint. The sympathy for Cynicism which always
marked the more austere wing of the Stoics was based on
genuine affinities, and indeed Cynicism did preserve a recog-
nizable version of the Socratic ethics in action. But the
* succession ' Socrates-Diogenes-Crates-Zeno is a fabrication.

Another current view of Cynicism which may be misleading
is that which describes it as ' the philosophy of the proletariat '.
To the modern reader such a phrase suggests an attempt to
replace the existing social order by a new system. But with
the exception of Cercidas and the reform party at Megalopolis,
and possibly the Cynics of Alexandria in the second century A.D.,
we shall not find Cynicism involving any kind of political
action on behalf of social reform. The Cynic * anarchy ' never
became so practical as to organize the murder of tyrants,
and their invective against wealth was as much for the spiritual
benefit of the rich as for the material betterment of the poor.
Indeed, by preaching that poverty and slavery are no bar
to happiness, the Cynics implied that a social revolution would
be superfluous.

The conclusion of this study is that Cynicism was really a
phenomenon which presented itself in three not inseparable
aspects a vagrant ascetic life, an assault on all established

xii A HISTORY OF CYNICISM

values, and a body of literary genres particularly well adapt^B
to satire and popular philosophical propaganda. The third
aspect is the one to which scholars have hitherto devoted most
attention ; ind the researches of Gerhard, Geffcken, Wend-
land, and others have shown how important and fertile was its
influence on Hellenistic and Roman literature. It is here
touched on only in passing, for my object has been rather to
give an account of individual Cynics, and to show them at
work in that role which they variously symbolized as the Scout
of God, the Schoolmaster, the Doctor of Mankind.

A HISTORY OF CYNICISM

CHAPTER I

ANTISTHENES. NO DIRECT CONNEXION WITH
CYNICS. HIS ETHICS

THE orthodox account of Cynicism regards Antisthenes as
the founder of the sect. This is due to the influence of
Diogenes Laertius, who says that Antisthenes ' learned his
hardihood from Socrates, and inaugurated the Cynic way of
life '- 1 His pupil was Diogenes of Sinope, Crates was a pupil
of Diogenes. Zeno, the founder of Stoicism, was a pupil of
Crates. There is thus an apostolic succession from Socrates
to the Stoics. But the validity of the tradition which makes
Antisthenes the founder of Cynicism has been questioned in
both ancient and modern times. 2 This is hardly surprising, for
a comparison between Antisthenes and the generally accepted
picture of his ' pupil and successor ' Diogenes shows more
points of divergence than of similarity. Both were ascetics :
both stressed the opposition of ndvo<; and tfdovtf : both used
Heracles as an example of jroVog. But the resemblance hardly
goes further. We know from the unquestionable authority
of Aristotle 3 that Antisthenes and his pupils were deeply
interested in the problems of neo-Eleatic logic ; Diogenes
designated the Megarians, the inheritors of that logic, as
* bilious \ 4 Antisthenes had a liking for Homeric inter-
pretations ; Diogenes remarked that * it was surprising that
grammarians should investigate the ills of Odysseus, yet be com-
pletely ignorant of their own \ 5 Antisthenes wrote treatises
on rhetorical subjects ; Diogenes ' despised rhetoricians who
made a great fuss about justice in their speeches, but never
practised it '. 6 Poor and ascetic Antisthenes certainly was ;
but it was in the manner of a companion of Socrates. He
possessed a house and small piece of property, 7 used a bed

1 vi. 2. 2 See Chap. 2, App. A.

3 Top., 104, B. 21 ; Met., 10246, 32, and 10436, 24.

4 D.L., vi. 24. 6 id., ib. 27. id., ib. 28. 7 Xen., Symp. 38.

2 I

2 A HISTORY OF CYNICISM

and furniture, would accompany Socrates to the banquets tff
the wealthiest men in Athens. Diogenes lived in the open
air, or in his tub ; the staples of his diet were dried figs and
water. Antisthenes frequented the lectures of the Sophists,
and derived his living from teaching ; Diogenes * poured scorn
on all his contemporaries V and lived the life of a beggar.
Again, Alcibiades was reproved by Antisthenes for the crime
of incest ; the avaidsia of Diogenes abolished all such bar-
riers. These are striking differences and are recognized as
such by ancient upholders of the * Cynic succession * from
Antisthenes to Diogenes. To minimize them, they adduce
stories which try to show that Diogenes reproved Antisthenes
for not practising what he preached ; thus he is made to
' liken Antisthenes to a brazen trumpet, which gave forth a
gre?J noise but was unable to hear itself *. 2 So in modern
times Gomperz, though accepting the * succession ', regards
Diogene^ as * the founder of a practical Cynicism '. But
a priori the traditional view seems unlikely, and one is
not disposed to accept it unless well supported by early
evidence. \

Such ev A Jence, however, is significantly lacking. Aristotle
refers to th'e pupils of Antisthenes as 'AvcioQeveioi, not as
xvvixoi, anal he further implies that they were mainly in-
terested iry logical studies. The only fragments which we
possess ofc Cynic writers contemporary with Diogenes are
those of/ Crates and Onesicratus of Astypalaea. None of
these rr/entions Antisthenes. Crates claimed Aioyevov<; elvcu
nohlrriz? Onesicratus, asked by the Indian Gymnosophist
whether any of the Greeks had led an ascetic life, replied,
* Yes,, Pythagoras and Socrates and Diogenes, and I was a
puipil of his.' 4 Middle Comedy has no reference to Antis-
thenes ; for examples of notorious poverty and asceticism it
makes use of a sect of Pythagoreans. In point of fact it is
most unlikely that Diogenes and Antisthenes can have been
contemporaries at Athens. The researches of Seltman 5 on
the coinage of Sinope suggest that Diogenes in all probability

1 D.L., vi. 24.

2 Dio Chrys., viii, p. 275 ; Stobaeus, Flor. y xiii. 19.
8 D.L., vi. 93. 4 Apud Strabo., xvi. 83-4.

6 A fuller account of Mr. Seltman's researches is given below in
connexion with the chronology of Diogenes.

ANTISTHENES 3

came to Athens later than 340 B.C., Antisthenes died soon
after 366. l A story which probably derives from Theo-
phrastus, 2 and hence may represent a contemporary account,
shows Diogenes himself claiming to have been converted to
philosophy, not by the teachings of Antisthenes, but by the
practical example of a mouse ; and which further suggests
that when he arrived at Athens he was already a devotee of
the ascetic life. It is only in the later writers, Epictetus,
Dio Chrysostom, Aelian, Stobaeus, Diogenes Laertius, and
Suidas, that we hear of a connexion between Antisthenes and
Diogenes ; and it is significant that they do not name any
other pupils of Antisthenes apart from Diogenes, and that
their stories about the relations between the two emphasize
Antisthenes' surliness to pupils and Diogenes' dissatisfaction
with his practical example. The tradition of a connexion
seems to have arisen some time between Onesicratus and
Epictetus ; the problem is to suggest among whom, and when,
it may have made its appearance. Ancient literary fabrications
are usually most readily discovered by the formula cut bono ? ;
so here, who would stand to gain if Diogenes were portrayed
as the pupil of Antisthenes ?

The answer is partly suggested by an anecdote which appears
in Diogenes Laertius' life of Zeno. 3 Coming to Athens after
his shipwreck, says this account, Zeno one day sat down in a
bookseller's shop. Now the bookseller was reading aloud the
second book of Xenophon's Memorabilia, which so delighted
Zeno that he asked where such men as Socrates might be
found. Very opportunely, Crates passed by, and the book-
seller said, * Follow that man.' From that day on, Zeno be-
came Crates' pupil. . . . The Stoics recognized the merits of
Cynicism, ' the wise man will play the Cynic, for Cynicism is a
short cut to virtue, as Apollodorus says in his Ethics '. 4 They

1 The birth of Antisthenes is usually placed c. 443, to fit the tradi-
tion that he fought at ' Tanagra ' (? Delium, 423). Xenophon's
Symposium, the dramatic date of which is 421 , shows him as a youngish
man, but already an intimate companion of Socrates. But there is
guarantee of Xenophon's chronological good faith on the point.
Diodorus Siculus (xv. 76) speaks of Antisthenes as being alive in
366, and Plutarch (Lye., 30) quotes a remark of his on the battle
of Leuctra. We know that Diogenes was well known in Athens,
c. 330-

2 D.L., vi. 22. 8 id., vii. 2, 4 id., ib. 121.

4 A HISTORY OF CYNICISM

probably regarded Cynicism as representing in its purest form
the ethical tradition of Socrates, and would be particularly
anxious to show that they themselves were the direct inheritors
of that tradition. Hence was constructed the ' succession '
Socrates Antisthenes Diogenes Crates Zeno : and hence
Epictetus can use Socrates, Antisthenes, and Diogenes as
good divinity for Stoic moral beliefs. 1 The Stoics would be
aided and abetted by another body of interested persons, the
Alexandrian writers of Successions of the Philosophers.' 2 ' Their
schemata treated Socrates as of great importance, indeed as
the virtual turning point of Greek philosophy. Any sect
that professed (pihoaoyia must trace back its pedigree to
Socrates ; how pedigrees came to be invented is clearly seen
when we consider how Hedonists of the third century were
linked up to Socrates via Aristippus. From the diagram in
Appendix C we see how in the * successions ' adopted by
Diogenes Laertius he is the nodal point of the * Ionian '
philosophy. The succession from Socrates via the Cynics
to the Stoics seems to have been established by Sotion of
Alexandria (c. 200-170 B.C.), the most voluminous and in-
fluential of these writers. He was probably followed in this
by Heracleides of Lembos, and Antisthenes and Sosicrates
of Rhodes. This succession had become orthodoxy by the
end of the Alexandrian period, and was apparently followed by
such first-century and later authors as Diocles, Pamphila, and
Favorinus. True there were dissenters (e.g. Hippobotus did
not regard the Cynics as one of the * ten ethical schools ') ;
but in Diogenes Laertius we have preserved the Schemata of
the Alexandrian writers of diado%di (Successions). He prefers,
he says, to regard Cynicism as a school of philosophy. It is a
&IQBOII;, on a par with Stoicism, with which it has uowwia?
Antisthenes learnt uaQreQia (endurance) from Socrates, and
* was the first founder of Cynicism '. 4 He it was who gave
the impulse to the indifference of Diogenes, the continence
of Crates, and the hardihood of Zeno, himself laying the
foundations of their code '. 5 Both Cynics and Stoics are
thus an* 'AvnaOevovs, though this is elsewhere amended to
' the more manly sect of Stoics ' (77 ardQcodforarr] ra)'Cxrj)*

1 So Epict., i. xvii. 12, also iii. xxiv. 51.

% Cf. Hicks, Diog. Laert. (Loeb series), Introd., p. xxiv.

3 D.L., vi. 104. 4 id., ib. 2. 5 id., ib. 15. 6 id., ib. 14.

ANTISTHENES 5

' Some persons think that the Cynic school derives its name
from the Cynosarges, and Antisthenes was himself called
1 'Anhoxticov ' 1 (or 'Avroxvcov). But Diogenes Laertius fails to
give any anecdote or apophthegm in which Antisthenes figures
as a xvcov ; and we recall that Aristotle refers to his pupils
as 'AvnaOev&oi. The supposed ' hostile ' references in Plato
and Isocrates make no use of the opportunity such a nickname
would afford. The original xvcov was undoubtedly Diogenes
himself. He is so called by Aristotle 2 : Cercidas of Megal-
opolis addresses him as * ahaOdax; \ Aioyevr^ Zavoq yovo<;
ovqdvio<; re xvcov '. 3 The origin of the nickname is clear
when we consider the use of the term in Homer. As is well
known, it denotes shamelessness or audacity ; Helen applies
it to herself in a fit of remorse ; 4 the enraged Hera calls
Artemis xvov addeeq (* shameless bitch ') ; Liddell and Scott
use this passage as evidence that xvcov was not so strong a
term of abuse as with us ; but the Homeric goddesses were
not given to mincing their words : the serving-maids of Penel-
ope t are called * bitches ' by Odysseus. 5 The name was un-
doubtedly first applied to Diogenes in a hostile sense, owing
to his avdidsia, or habit of * doing everything in public ',
and was retained by him and the later Cynics for its poten-
tialities for allegory. The original and the later allegorizing
explanations of the name are preserved by a scholium on
Aristotle. 6

There are four reasons why the * Cynics ' are so named. First
because of the * indifference ' of their way of life (did to adidyoqov
trig fcoffc), for they make a cult of adiayoQia and, like dogs, eat and
make love in public, go barefoot, and sleep in tubs and at cross-
roads. . . . The second reason is that the dog is a shameless
animal, and they make a cult of shamelessness, not as being beneath
modesty ('Avdwg\ but as superior to it. ... The third reason is
that the dog is a good guard, and they guard the tenets of their
philosophy. . . . The fourth reason is that the dog is a dis-
criminating animal which can distinguish between its friends and
enemies. ... So do they recognize as friends those who are
suited to philosophy, and receive them kindly, while those unfitted
they drive away, like dogs, by barking at them.

1 id., ib. 13. 2 Rhet., iii. 10. 7.

3 Apud D.L., vi. 77. 4 II., vi. 344 and 356.

5 Od., xviii. 338. 6 Ed. Brandis, p. 23.

6 A HISTORY OF CYNICISM

The first certain application of the term KVVIKQ<; to any of
Diogenes' followers is a fragment of Menander's Didumi. 1

cbarjeg Kqatrfti rq> xvvixti noff rj

Now there is no evidence that either Crates or Diogenes made
use of the Cynosarges ; hence one may infer that the etymol-
ogy deriving Cynic from the Cynosarges was an invention
of the writers of diado%di, very probably by analogy with the
Stoa and the Academy.

Etymologically, then, the attempt to connect Antisthenes
with the KWIKQI breaks down. But Diogenes Laertius further
says that Antisthenes adopted what afterwards came to be
recognized as the insignia of the Cynic, the Tglficov, the wallet,
and the staff. The sources he gives for this statement enable
us to perceive its unreliability.

He was the first, Diocles tells us, to double his cloak, and be content
with that one garment and to take up a staff and wallet. Neanthes
too asserts that he was the first to double his mantle. Sosiciates,
however, in the third book of his Successions of Philosophers says
this was first done by Diodorus of Aspendus, who also let his beard
grow and used a staff and wallet. 2

The significance of Diodorus of Aspendus we shall see shortly.
Meanwhile, one remarks that Neanthes, writing probably in
the third century, only suggests that Antisthenes doubled
his cloak ; we have seen that, like Socrates, he probably
wore the simplest clothing. It is only in Diocles, writing in
the first century A.D., that the staff and the wallet are thrown
in. In the Life of Diogenes? it is stated that

some say Diogenes was the first to fold his cloak because he was
obliged to sleep in it as well, and he carried a wallet to hold his
victuals ... He did not lean upon a staff till he grew infirm :
but afterwards he would carry it everywhere, not indeed in the
city, but when walking along the road with it and with his wallet ;
so say Olympiodorus, once a magistrate of Athens, Polyeuctes the
orator, and Lysanias the son of Aeschrio. 4

The three persons named were contemporaries of Theo-

1 In. D.L., vi. 93. 2 id., ib. 13.

8 id., ib. 22, 23. 4 id., ib. 23.

ANTISTHENES 7

phrastus, and von Fritz l contends with great probability that
the reference to Diogenes comes from a dialogue of Theo-
phrastus in which they figured. This gives us a good early
tradition ; and implies that the staff and the wallet formed
the equipment of the vagabond beggar. Odysseus entered
the palace at Ithaca ' in the likeness of an aged and woeful
beggar, leaning on a staff, and wretched was the raiment he
wore on his body ' ; and Irus wore ' a miserable wallet, full
of holes, and slung by a twisted cord (Od., xvii. 335 ; xviii.
1 08). Aristophanes in the Acharniam 2 says that amongst the
' Properties * kept by Euripides for that unhappily conceived
character, Telephus, were a ragged cloak (Qaxlov), a basket
(anvQidtov), and a beggar's staff. For Antisthenes, who was
no beggar, such a get-up would be pointless. It was, how-
ever, used in his day by the ascetic Pythagoreans, whom we
know of through the Telauges of Aeschines, and to which sect
Diodorus of Aspendus belonged. Aeschines 3 mentions the
Ovhaxoc;, the pouch or wallet, carried by Telauges ; the Middle
Comedy 4 has references to a xdoQvxoq, a leather wallet, as
the distinguishing mark of these philosophers. Clearly this
served the same purpose as the anvQidiov of Telephus or the
nrjga of Diogenes.

Diogenes Laertius, though himself regarding Cynicism as
one of the minor Socratic schools, lets it be known that others
held a different view. We have seen how Hippobotus 5
refused to regard the Cynics as one of the ten ethical schools ;
elsewhere it is remarked that * certain persons regard Cynicism
as a mode of life 6 not as a sect of philosophy '. This view is
fortunately preserved by the Emperor Julian. He quotes
with approval the dictum of Oenomaus of Gadara, him-
self a Cynic, that * Cynicism is neither Antisthenism nor
Diogenism ' . . .

For [says Julian] in all ages men have practised this philosophy.
... It does not need any special study, one should merely hearken

1 Quellen-Untersuchungen zu Leben und Phil, des D. von Sinope,
1926.
2 Acharn., n, 435, 448, 453.

3 Cf. Dittmar, Aeschines von Sphettos, 417.

4 Antiph., fr. n. 76; fr. n. 67. 5 D.L., i. 19.
6 id., vi. 103.

8 A HISTORY OF CYNICISM

to the Delphic god when he enjoins these two maxims yv&Oi
credvrov and nctQdxaQat-ov r6 vo^io^a. Hence obviously the founder
of this philosophy is he who is responsible for all the goods the
Greeks possess, the god at Delphi. 1

Though he grants that Cynicism is a ' type of philosophy ', 2
and one that ' rivals the noblest ', he insists that it is * universal
and most natural '. 3 Noteworthy is his express statement that
in his time no serious Cynic treatises were preserved ; 4 either
the voluminous writings of Antisthenes, known at least in
part to Diogenes Laertius, had in the interim perished, or
else Julian did not connect them with Cynicism. When he
does mention Antisthenes together with Diogenes and Crates,
it is as a writer of myths ; 5 Hesiod, Xenophon, and Plato are
also named in this connexion. Throughout, Julian emphasizes
that Cynicism is a way of life : he will describe its true nature
for the benefit of those ' about to enter upon this way '. He
insists that one should distinguish the outward manifestations
from the rationale, the true feature, of the Cynic life. 6 Cucullus
non facit monachum, nor staff and wallet the Cynic. ^

We have seen, then, that it is extremely unlikely that there
was any personal contact between Antisthenes and Diogenes.
But it cannot be denied that the resemblance between the
ethics of Antisthenes and those of the Cynics was sufficiently
close to make the tradition of such connexion a plausible
fiction. The earliest and best authority for Antisthenes'
ethics is the Symposium of Xenophon. It will be remembered
that each of the chief guests at the banquet was required to
state what he was most proud of, and afterwards to deliver a
speech justifying his choice. Antisthenes professed to be
proud of his wealth, a statement which immediately provoked
attention, for at the time he ' did not possess an obol '. 7 When
his turn came to elaborate his choice, he explained that he had
spoken figuratively, " I think, gentlemen, that men's poverty
and wealth is to be sought for, not in their estates, but in their
souls ' an essentially Socratic view (cf. Apology 290-308).
Material wealth is a malignant disease

for some despots destroy whole families, kill men wholesale, and

1 Julian, I88C-D. 2 id., 1826. 3 id., 1876.

4 id., i86B. 6 id., 20QA. 6 id., 2OiA.

7 See Note i, Chap I.

ANTISTHENES 9

often enslave entire cities, for the sake of money ... for my own
part my possessions are so great that I myself can hardly discover
them all ; yet I have enough so that I can eat until I am no longer
hungry and drink to the point of not being thirsty, and I clothe
myself so that I do not feel the cold more than my opulent friend
here, Callias. When I get into my house I regard the walls as
exceedingly warm tunics, and the roof as an exceptionally thick
blanket ; and I have sufficient bedding to make it a hard task to
get me awake of a morning. When my body needs sexual satis-
faction, whatever lies to hand is good enough for me. So the
women I associate with are exceeding grateful to me, for no one
else will approach them. In fact, all these possessions seem to me
so enjoyable Jiat I could not wish for greater pleasure from them,
but indeed for less ; for some of them do seern to me more pleasur-
able than is advisable. The most valuable possession I derive from
my wealth is this, that even though someone were to deprive me
of all I possess, I see no occupation so humble that I could not
derive adequate livelihood from it ... and one should note that
wealth of this sort makes men generous. For Socrates, from whom
I acquired my wealth, did not dole it out to me by measure and
weight, but gave me all that I was capable of bearing. Similarly,
I myself am not miserly to anyone, but I openly show my abun-
dance to all my friends, and I share out to anyone who desires it
the wealth that is in my soul [cf. Apology 316, 33B]. But you
will observe that the most luxurious of all my possessions is that
I always have leisure to go to see whatever is worth seeing, or hear
whatever is worth hearing, and, (what I prize above all) can pass
the whole day at leisure in the company of Socrates (cf. Theaet.

I 7 2D).

The doctrine, expounded in Socratic phraseology, is the
familiar one in later Greek philosophy, of asceticism as the
surest way of attaining evdaifjiovia (happiness). Now the
evidence of Aristophanes and Ameipsias shows us that
asceticism of some kind was practised in the * Socratic circle '.
The Clouds describes the inhabitants of the ' Thinking-
Shop ' as ' those pale-faced, barefooted wretches, like
Chaerephon and Socrates ' ; and suggests that the prospect
confronting the initiate is ivnreiv, neivf^v^ diyfjv \ avxnelv,
Qiyovv, aoxov deiQew y while there are references to Socrates'
need of a cloak and sandals, and the generally unwashed and
unshaven character of his companions. 1 Clearly some sort of
asceticism must have characterized them if the burlesque was
1 11. 103-4, 441-2 (Oxford Text).

io A HISTORY OF CYNICISM

to be plausible : the evidence of Plato, without containing any
direct reference as to its origin, certainly suggests that Socrates
followed an ascetic mode of life. Thus in the Phaedrus (zzgA.)
he is represented as being * always barefooted ', in the
Symposium (i74A) an occasion when he, for once, wore a new
cloak and sandals is explained away as being a gesture in
honour of the Banquet to which he was going ; and, more
explicitly, we have the testimony of Alcibiades (Symp. 2198)
of Socrates' remarkable endurance of hunger, cold, fatigue.
This side of Socrates' character is given in greater detail in the
Memorabilia^ but as it is uncertain whether or to what degree
Xenophon is there influenced by Antisthenes' own portrayal
of Socrates, perhaps his evidence should not be unduly pressed. 2
But clearly this brand of asceticism is a very Socratic thing.
Socrates neglected the pursuit of sensual pleasures, just as he
neglected his own financial interests, to concentrate on the
chief object of his ' mission ' the * care of his soul ' and the
exhortation to his fellow-citizens to care for theirs. 3 It should
be distinguished from two other ways of life with which it has
sometimes been confused : the avraqxeia of a man like Hippias ;
and the rigid asceticism, which becomes an end-in-itself, of
Diogenes and his associates. 4 The latter practised, as we shall
see, absolute simplicity of living, absolute renunciation of
comforts. But Socrates, as is known from the Symposium of
Plato, could enjoy good living when it came his way : and so

1 Especially in i. 2. i, i. 3. 3, and i. 6. 2.

2 Joel (Der echte und der Xenophontische Sokrates) regards Xeno-
phon as throughout dependent upon Antisthenes, and uses the
Memorabilia to reconstruct Antisthenes' ethical system. More
recently H. Gomperz (Die Sokratische Frage ah geschichtliches
Problems : Historische Zeitschrift, 1924), while admitting Joel's
premisses that the Socrates of the Memorabilia is the Socrates of
Antisthenes, attacks his conclusions that this is therefore not the
Socrates of history. Antisthenes, according to him, was the most
faithful disciple of Socrates : his picture of the Master is likely to
be the most authentic. Other scholars regard the Memorabilia as,
in the main, an independent attempt to give a portrait of Socrates,
though it may borrow details from Plato and Antisthenes. The
controversy is clearly one which falls outside the scope of this essay ;
but in discussing the probable influence of Socrates upon Antis-
thenes, I have thought it wiser to draw parallels from the early
Platonic dialogues, and to use the Memorabilia only as supplementary
to inferences based on other evidence.

3 Cf. Apology 290, 30^, 4 See Note 2 to Chap. I.

ANTISTHENES 11

in the Symposium of Xenophon, Antisthenes drinks his Thasian
wine, though he does not omit to add that he enjoys it less
than he would simpler fare if he were really thirsty. Antis-
thenes also used a house, a bed, and other comforts with which
Diogenes dispensed.

Even the scanty doxographical section 1 of Diogenes
Laertius' biography shows the influence of Socrates as para-
mount in Antisthenes' ethics. The familiar Socratic doctrine
that aQ&rri may be taught appears, and aqsrri seems to have
been defined in a Socratic way. It is self-sufficient as regards
happiness, needing nothing else but the strength of a Socrates,
it is * a weapon that cannot be taken away ' ; again, as wisdom
it is * the safest kind of wall ' which must be constructed ' in
our own impregnable reasoning '. This last implies the
Socratic view of virtue as knowledge ; and the unity of the
virtues appears in an Antisthenean doctrine preserved in a
commentary on Homer. * Antisthenes says that if the wise
man does anything, he does it in accordance with virtue as a
whol^.' (Schol. Lips, on II., xv. 123). Further, the titles of
some of his works are those of * virtues ' which we know to
have been investigated by Socrates. There are for instance
writings on Courage (cf. Laches), on Injustice and Impiety
(cf. Euthyphro\ on Justice and Courage (cf. Protagoras). It
is probable that in these works the same method was pursued
as that which appears in the early Platonic dialogues, i.e.
* popular ' instances of the virtue under discussion were taken
and shown to be inadequate by the true standard. This is
suggested by a quotation from Antisthenes preserved by
Athenaeus (xii. 534^) via Satyrus *AvTioQevr]<; 6 ZaMqariKoQ
cog dr) avronrrji; yeyovax; rov *Akm{$t,adov ' ia%VQov avrcv xal
avdQ&dr] Hal ajialdsvrov KOI ro^a^ov xai WQOLIOV e<p j rjfax(a$
ndori<; yeveaOai (prjcriv.

The point lies in anaidevroq ; lax^S and avdqeia are
virtues when they are of the right brand, the ZWganw)
this was what Alcibiades lacked, owing to his want of

1 D.L., vi. 12, 13.

2 Cf. Dittmar, Aeschines von Sphettos, p. 86, n. 68. He regards
the quotation as from the Cyrus of Antisthenes. Miiller prints it
under the fragments of the Alcibiades. The point probably cannot
be definitely settled,

12 A HISTORY OF CYNICISM

In intimate connexion with this view of aqerri (Virtue) are
the tenets of Antisthenes about the aocpoq which occur in the
same passage of Diogenes Laertius. * The aoyoq will rule his
life, not in accordance with the established Laws, but according
to those of Virtue. ' The oocpos is self-sufficient/ * The
oocpoq will love, for he alone knows how to love.' The Virtue
of the wise man, which is ' self-sufficient as regards happiness ',
is precisely that which Socrates insisted could be taught. 1
This is brought out most clearly in the Phaedo (8aA ff.) where
Socrates implies two levels of aqerri ; the first, a drifion^fi ncd
nofanxf] aqerri . . . I $ eOov$ re Hal /teAerrjs ysyovvia avev
(pdoaoyicu; re uai vov, the practisers of which will be rein-
carnated as bees, ants, wasps or other ' social animals ', or as
worthy men (^Erqioi avdqs<;} : the other, that of ol 6@0a)<;
(pi^oaocpovvret; and navrshax; KoBaqoi and also of ol (piXo^aQelq
who shall * enter the communion of the gods '. Since it
occurs in the Phaedo, this distinction is in all probability that
of Socrates ; and it is one of great importance for subsequent
Greek thought. From the time of Socrates onwards, the
gulf between the oocpos and the ordinary human being and
his standards tends to widen, not only in Antisthenes but also
in such Platonic passages as Theaetetus 175 A ff. (where the
philosopher is totally indifferent to birth, wealth, fame,
or rank), till eventually it becomes unbridgeable when we
arrive at that paragon of inhuman virtue, the ooyos of the
Stoics.

This view of the oocpoi; was Antisthenes' reason for stress-
ing the doctrines of rfdovrj and novoq : doctrines which the
Alexandrian writers of Successions relied upon to prove his
spiritual affinity with Zeno and the Stoics. Again, the
influence of Socrates may be traced. In the great speech in
the Phaedo y describing the life of the philosopher, it is stated
that such a man will above all seek to emancipate himself from
the flesh and its desires, its pleasures, and its pains, for every
instance in which rjdovrj or kvnr} is felt, is a nail which nails
the soul more firmly to the body. 2 tfdovtf and MTH?, pleasure
and pain, are thus the chief enemies of the man who is trying
to ' tend his soul '. evrsfela and oaxpQoavvr] are prophylactic
against r;<5ow/, but what antidotes can be found for Hnr\
which generally comes from circumstances outside our con-
1 Cf. Burnet, Thales to Plato, p. 174. * Phaedo, 838 ff.

ANTISTHENES 13

trol ? 1 The remedy of Antisthenes was novoq (toil), a word
which he was perhaps the first to use in a technical sense.
Socrates never uses novoc; in this way in any Platonic writing, 2
and the fact that he does so use it in Xenophon's Memorabilia
may be due to the influence of Antisthenes.

' That toil is a good thing ', says Diogenes Laertius, * he
established by the example of Heracles the Great and Cyrus,
choosing one from the Greeks, the other from the barbarians/
This sentence has been used as evidence for attributing cos-
mopolitanism to Antisthenes, but it will not really bear that
interpretation. In fact, what Antisthenes did was merely to
choose two examples from that gallery of great figures, some
historic, some legendary, familiar to every educated person of
his day. Admittedly few figures in that gallery were * bar-
barians ', and of those few were cast in the role of hero, but
such was undoubtedly the case with Cyrus. The great king, who
appears in a favourable light even in the Old Testament,
appears to have exercised a fascination over the Greeks through-
out the fifth century. For Antisthenes, he appears not only
as an example of the value of novos, but, as also for Xenophon,
as the ideal of fiaaiXeia.

The choice of Heracles to exemplify novot; is of course an
obvious one. ' Who of all the sons of Zeus ', asks Unjust
Logic in the Clouds, ' endured the most hardships and greatest
toil ? ' ' Why, Heracles/ is the answer, and from the practice
of that hero the moral is drawn that hot baths do not really
have an enervating effect. But a favourable portrayal of
Heracles, though it was certainly not originated by Antisthenes,
appears to have been a recent tradition in his time. Cyrus
also figured later in Cynic allegory, but did not play so
prominent a part therein as Heracles, who became a veritable
patron saint to the Cynic movement.

The ethics of Antisthenes, then probably largely through
his portrayal of Socrates had a considerable influence on the
Cynics. But the narrow concentration on ethics to the
exclusion of all other aspects of philosophy, the chief character-
istic of Diogenes and the Cynics, is not found in the case of

1 Cf. the case of the unfortunate Dionysius, ' the Renegade ', also
suffered such agonies from ophthalmia that he could not bring
himself to admit that Pain was adidcpoQov (D.L., vii. 166).

2 In the Phaedo he says ol (pifoaoyovvcei; . .

14 A HISTORY OF CYNICISM

Antisthenes. The titles of his works cover ethics, logic,
politics, and what were later called metaphysics, and we know
that he was interested in rhetoric and in the * interpretation '
of Homer. His philosophy presumably formed a coherent
whole, though there is not sufficient evidence to reconstruct
it. But the impression left by an examination of what are
known to have been his doctrines in various departments of
knowledge is that there is little here that is original. His
logical position was that of the * neo-Eleatics ' : the influence
of Socrates is paramount in his ethics : his political views are
a synthesis compounded of the Socratic ideal of the ao^oc, the
' Sophistic ' opposition between vojuo<; and (pvais and the
reactions of a ' Socratic man ' to the events of contemporary
history. In his interest in ' names ' one may suspect the
influence of Prodicus : that of Gorgias is undoubted on his
style and his rhetorical studies : in Homeric ' interpretation '
he followed the already popular method of allegory. The
conclusion is that here is a typical minor figure of that time
of intellectual ferment, the age of Socrates and the Sophists ;
probably Cicero's judgement of him is fair enough ''homo
acutus magis quam eruditus '. But Antisthenes' philosophy
was a structure which rested on flimsy foundations. Its basis
was the ' neo-Eleatic ' logic : and before long the difficulties
with which that system was confronted and the solutions it
propounded were alike swept away by the Sophistes of Plato.
This probably accounts for the contemptuous tone of Aris-
totle's references to Antisthenes, 1 and suggests that Antis-
thenes' logical treatises were quickly obsolete. But there is
ample warrant of his popularity in ancient times. He was
accepted as one of the canons of pure Attic style : Dionysius
of Halicarnassus groups him with Andocides, Antiphon,
Lysias, Critias, and Xenophon : Phrynichus ranks him with
Plato, Demosthenes, and Critias. This popularity he must
have attained as a writer of ZcaxqaTMoi Aoyoi.* The
Socrates of his dialogues was undoubtedly the ascetic, the
* man with a mission ', an aspect of the Master which tended
to be obscured in the later Platonic dialogues, where Socrates
becomes increasingly the mouthpiece for Plato's own thought.
The Memorabilia of Xenophon are to some extent a reaction

1 Cf. Met. 10246, 27 ff., 10436, 1 8.

2 See note 3 to Chap. I.

ANTISTHENES 15

against Plato's portrayal of the Master : Antisthenes, together
with other disciples, may well have felt that some such
corrective was needed.

To the Stoics and to the Alexandrian writers of Successions,
Antisthenes would be most familiar as the author of Socratic
discourses, in which the tradition of Socrates the ascetic was
predominant. Antisthenes himself was known to have been
master of a philosophic * school ' ; his ethics bore a marked
resemblance to those of the Cynics and Stoics : he was there-
fore the obvious choice as the first link in the * apostolic
succession ' in which the Stoics wished to link themselves up
to Socrates. Antisthenes thus became the ' founder of
Cynicism ', and achieved a position in the history of philosophy
to which his achievements as a thinker scarcely entitled him.
We may agree with Vallette that he was the ' precursor of
Cynicism ', but for the founder of the sect we must turn to
Diogenes of Sinope.

NOTES TO CHAPTER I

1 . Antisthenes must have possessed money at some timb to be able
to attend the lectures of Gorgias. In Xenophon's Symposium he
appears to possess a small piece of land. Perhaps, as Burnet thinks
was the case with Socrates, his poverty was of rather recent date
in 421 or thereabouts (Symp., iii. 8).

2. It has been suggested that the avraQxeia of Hippias, who once
appeared at an Olympian festival wearing a cloak, girdles, ring,
sandals, &c., all made by himself (Plato, Hipp. 3686), had an influence
on Antisthenes' view of self-sufficiency. This is to confuse two
fundamentally different methods of approach to the problem. For
the individual avrdgxeia may be obtained either by (a) an extension
of one's accomplishments and aptitudes till they can fulfil all the
' desires ' (this is no^vrgoma : the versatility of a man like Hippias),
or (b) an elimination of the * desires ' till they reach a point at which
their demands are light and readily satisfied (this is evrekela, the
method of Antisthenes and Socrates. This same point may be illus-
trated if we consider amaQxeia in the meaning frequently used in
Thucydides ' independent ' in the political sense, of a city which
is sufficient to itself in both military and economic resources. If a
state has relatively low * demands ' (i.e. a * low standing of living '),
the occupations of its citizens will be few and simple. If its desires
become more complex (i.e. it is attaining a * high standard of living '),
then its citizens must engage in all manner of industries for it to be

16 A HISTORY OF CYNICISM

self-sufficient. The two states of society are contrasted in Rep. 370
and 373.

3. Panaetius accepted his Socratic dialogues as genuine : he is
grouped with Xenophon and Plato not only by Diogenes Laertius (ii.
47), but also by Epictetus (ii. 17. 35), Pronto (de. eloc. 98), Lucian
(ad. doct. 27) and Julian (21 $C).

CHAPTER II
DIOGENES AND HIS ASSOCIATES

(a) * EVEN bronze groweth old with Time, but thy fame, Dio-
genes, not all Eternity shall take away. For thou alone didst
point out to mortals the lesson of self-sufficingness, and the easiest
path of life.' * The prophecy has in a way been fulfilled ;
for Diogenes is one of the more familiar figures of antiquity.
Yet with him, as with other historical personages, the very
merits of a good story have obscured rather than illuminated
its moral, avraqneia is forgotten but the tub survives, nor
does one bother to inquire closely precisely why Alexander
was asked to stand out of the sun. In classical times, too, the
reputation of Diogenes was subjected to a similar process ;
for it rested largely on that Greek delight in personality for
its own sake, quite apart from its didactic value. A people
who can enjoy a good story can always invent oae ; hence
Diogenes soon after his death became a literary stock figure,
and as such, like Sir John Falstaff, achieved a reality almost
independent of his historical existence. Small wonder, then,
that it is hard to establish about him anything that by the
severer standards of historical criticism can be admitted as
fact. It is a task which must be attempted, but with caution ;
the case of Diogenes is one in which irrefutability can be
purchased at too high a price. If judgement is to be entirely
suspended because so few of the stories about him can be
verified, then the baby is emptied away with the bath water.
All Aberdeen stories may be invented, yet the inference remains
that the Aberdonians are a thrifty race. So, in analysing the
anecdotes about Diogenes, one should expect the illumination
rather of character than of fact. If from such an analysis a
coherent individual portrait emerges, it may be possible to
account for Diogenes* influence on later literature and thought.

1 Anth. Pal., xvi. 334 ; said by D.L. to have been inscribed on a
memorial at Sinope.

3 i7

i8 A HISTORY OF CYNICISM

A scrutiny of the available sources shows the difficulty of
arriving at a satisfactory estimate of Diogenes. 1 Though these
sources vary in value, they have, apart from Philodemus, a
common feature in their lateness. They are the outcome of a
considerable literature which grew up round Diogenes for
at least two centuries after his death, and which is only known
to us from references in later authors. It is necessary to form
some idea of this literature before attempting any estimate of
the * historical ' Diogenes.

The literature under consideration falls into two classes.
In the first may be put the Cynic and Stoic works, in
which Diogenes appears as the ideal cro^og, demonstrating in
divers situations, the virtues of avrdgxeia, and exemplifying
the quality of naQQ^aia in contact with the great historical
figures of the day. In the second class is the general litera-
ture of the writers of Successions (diado%di), and the collectors
of anecdotes, for whom the individuality and humour of Dio-
genes would have particular attraction. Of the Cynic authors
the first to be considered is Crates. Crates wrote shortly after
the death of Diogenes, and his works contain genuine reflections
of his master's teachings ; though in the surviving fragments
there are few direct references to Diogenes, they are our
best authority for contemporary Cynic practices. Metrocles
of Maroneia, 2 the associate of Crates, compiled a book of
%Qslai ; perhaps here originated the * literary ' Diogenes whose
apophthegms were used and probably added to by Bion of
Borysthenes. Invention was soon busy with the life as well as
the sayings of Diogenes, von Fritz 3 adduces good reasons
for thinking that the story of the ' Sale of Diogenes ' was the
invention of Menippus ; a subject also handled by a certain
Eubulus, 4 of whom nothing else is known. At any rate the
legend seems to have established itself, for it was used
by Cleomenes 5 in his book On Pedagogues ; like Eubulus,
Cleomenes would seem to have taken particular interest in
showing Diogenes as the ideal naidaycoyog and olxovofjioQ.
The Stoics 6 made use of Diogenes for the purpose of
moralizing, but they seem to have found a certain amount
of bowdlerizing necessary, as will appear when we consider

1 See Note i to Chapter II. 2 D.L., vi. 33.

3 op. cit., pp. 22-5. 4 D.L., vi. 30.

6 id., ib. 75. 6 id., ib. 32, 37, 43.

DIOGENES AND HIS ASSOCIATES 19

the authenticity of the writings attributed to Diogenes
himself.

The general literature may be said to start with Theo-
phrastus, who referred to Diogenes in the Megarian dialogue,' 1
and who wrote a book entitled TCOV Awyevovs avvayaiyrj 2
' a compendium of the works (or apophthegms ?) of Diogenes '
a title which suggests that already inventions and falsi-
fications were current. Whether the * Eubulides J who wrote
neql Aioyevovq 3 is the contemporary and opponent of Aris-
totle, or a confusion with the Eubulus mentioned above,
cannot be decided. Sotion, 4 the best known of the writers of
diado%dt, y appears to have treated of Diogenes in his fourth
and seventh books ; von Fritz 5 argues that he approved a
Stoic redaction of Diogenes' works ; Stoic criticism seems
also to have influenced Sosicrates and Satyrus. 8 Diocles of
Magnesia 7 was apparently particularly interested in the Cynics,
he was a close friend of the Cynic Meleager of Gadara.
Antisthenes of Rhodes, 8 another writer of diado%di, is quoted
by L^ertius for details of the death of Diogenes.

Such are the available references for the Diogenes-literature
of the fourth and third centuries B.C. ; in all probability
they only represent a portion of it. For the Cynics and Stoics
Diogenes became a second Heracles, the ideal ocxpdt; who
could be used to emphasize any worthy moral or exemplify any
desirable characteristic. These stories would be reflected in
the general literature, and augmented by anecdotes which grew
up around him as the embodiment of independent common
sense and ready repartee. Almost all of this literature is lost ;
but such traces as we have been able to follow show how the
story of Diogenes, like a snowball rolled downhill, gathered
additions to itself as it went along.

I return to the later sources which form the only available
evidence for Diogenes. Unsatisfactory though they are, the
researches of von Fritz have shown how to make the best
use of them. Since all are based on the lost Diogenes-litera-
ture whose traces we have endeavoured to follow, their value
will clearly depend on the facilities they offer for deciding
the trustworthiness of their sources. On this criterion von

1 id., ib. 22. 2 id., v. 43. 8 id., vi. 20.

4 id., ib. 26, 80. 5 op. cit., pp. 55-8. 6 D.L., vi. 80.

7 id., ib. 20, 56. 8 id., ib. 77, 87.

20 A HISTORY OF CYNICISM

Fritz shows that little profit is to be had from the accounts
of Diogenes in Epictetus, Dio Chrysostom, or Julian. Their
writings form an individual and coherent whole, in which
borrowings from earlier sources have been assimilated and
may not readily be resolved again. Partial exceptions to this
are the tenth oration of Dio, which contains a passage ulti-
mately derived from the Oedipus of Diogenes, and the sixth
oration of Julian, which is, however, of more value for Crates
than Diogenes. It is otherwise with Diogenes Laertius, whose
literary demerits are to our advantage. His Life of Diogenes
is a cento whose component parts may be dissected out ; and
in many cases he himself names his sources. 1

Diogenes was born at Sinope 2 in Pontus, a city of com-
mercial importance but on the outer rim of the Greek world.
His father was apparently a man of position, but for some
reason Diogenes was exiled, and finally came to Athens. These
events were narrated in widely different accounts, some of
which are retailed by Diogenes Laertius. 3

Diodes relates that he went into exile because his father was
entrusted with the money of the State and adulterated the coinage.
But Eubulides in his book on Diogenes says that Diogenes himself
did this and was forced to leave home along with his father. More-
over, Diogenes himself actually confesses in his Pordalus that he
adulterated the coinage. Some say that having been appointed to
superintend the workmen they urged him to do this, and that he
went to Delphi, or to the Delian oracle in his own city, and inquired
of Apollo whether he should do what he was urged to. When
the god gave him permission to alter the political currency, not
understanding what this meant, he adulterated the State coinage,
and when he was detected, according to some he was banished,
while according to others he voluntarily quitted the city for fear
of banishment. One version is that his father entrusted him with
the money and that he debased it, in consequence of which the
father was imprisoned and died, while the son fled, came to Delphi,
and inquired not whether he should falsify the currency, but what
he should do to gain the greatest reputation ; and that then it was
he received the oracle.

The path of rationalizing criticism is clear, and Schwartz 4
and von Fritz follow it confidently. According to the latter, 6

1 See Note 2 to Chapter II. 2 D.L., vi. 20. 3 id., ib. 21.
4 Charakter-kopfe, u. (1911), 23. 5 op. cit., p. 20.

DIOGENES AND HIS ASSOCIATES 21

the case is palpably one of invention ; its basis is that Diogenes
himself used the paradox naqa^dqarreiv TO vojbuajua ' Alter
the currency/ and thus gave rise to the stories. As for the
banker father, he becomes explicable in the light of Diogenes'
mission (naQa%aQarreiv TO vojuiajua) ; for did not Socrates
have for mother a juala (midwife) and pride himself on his
fjtaievTMfj liyy)} ? He follows Schwartz in regarding the
oracle as an invention imitating the famous reply to Socrates.
In the absence of material evidence, such criticism is of course
the best method of handling the problem. But according to
tradition one of the lessons taught by Diogenes was that a
great deal of theory may be upset by a small amount of
brute fact. The impossibility of motion having been proved
by argument, he got up and walked. A similar comment on
the arguments of Schwartz and von Fritz is supplied by Mr.
Seltman in a paper read to the Cambridge Philological Society. 1
This paper establishes that there was a Sinopean monetary
magistrate called Hicesias at a time when the coinage of
Sinope was subject to naQa%dqai;i<; to a degree unparalleled in
any other Greek city at any period. It further suggests for
Diogenes' arrival in Athens a much later date than 'ne tradi-
tional one, thus strengthening the contention that his association
with Antisthenes is an invention. On the other hNind, Mr.
Seltman 's research not only confirms the traditional account
of Diogenes' parentage and exile, but also throws a good
deal of light on the reasons for his subsequent assault on
established values. His father had been an important State
official, he had himself occupied a position of trust ; the
father, through pursuing a patriotic policy, had been unjustly
thrown into prison, and had perhaps died there; 2 the son,
already well on in years, had been forced to leave his country.
He had ample justification for feeling a grudge against society,
and for such contemptuous bitterness as appears in the re-
mark, * Most men are so nearly mad that a finger's breadth
would make the difference.' 3

The story of the oracle Mr. Seltman accepts as founded on
fact. The embittered Diogenes, smarting under the loss of

1 I am greatly indebted to Mr. Seltman for his kindness in allowing
me to read the MS. of this paper, which has not appeared in print.
For a summary of his arguments cf. Note 3 to Chap. II.

* D.L., vi. 21. 8 id., ib. 35.

22 A HISTORY OF CYNICISM

his position, asks, * What shall I do to become famous ? *
* Alter the currency/ is the response. It is a hypothesis, as
any explanation of the story must necessarily be. But there
is much force in Schwartz's contention that the story is an
imitation of the famous response given to Socrates. ' Is there
any one wiser than Socrates ? ' had been the question of
Chaerephon ; to which that of Diogenes bears resemblance.
Schwartz does not adduce, as he might have done, the very
similar story of the oracle given to Zeno. 1

It is stated by Hecato and Apollonius of Tyre in his first book on
Zeno that he consulted the oracle to know what he should do to
attain the best life, and that the god's response was that he should
take on the colour of the dead. Whereupon, perceiving what this
meant, he studied ancient authors.

Now it is perhaps significant that stories which look like
imitations of the response to Socrates should be told about
the Stoic ' saints ', Diogenes and Zeno. The Stoics, at least

down to Panaetius, believed in oracles

they say that divination in all its forms is a real and substantial
fact, if there is really Providence. And they prove it to be actually
a science pn the evidence of certain results : so Zeno, Chrysippus
in the second book of the de Divinatione, and Athenodorus, and
Posidonius . . . 2

It is quite possible that the Stoics, concerned to link them-
selves up with Socrates, should have circulated these stories
of how divine advice had also been given to two other sages
of the Succession. But whether the story of the oracle be
an invention or no, there is little doubt that Diogenes him-
self made effective use of the phrase naqa^dqaTTeiv TO vojLUOjua.
Diogenes Laertius says * he himself admits in the Pordalus
cog Tiaqa^dqa^ai TO vofjua^a '. 3 One can readily imagine the
allegorical value to be extracted. * I was exiled for literally
" altering the currency J> ; my philosophy teaches men to
" alter the currency " in another sense. Let us strike out of
circulation false standards and values of all kinds/ Perhaps
further, ' Socrates said that his work was done at the
command of the Delphic god : I make the same claim for
mine/

1 D.L., vii. 2. a id,, ib. 149. 3 id., vi. 20.

DIOGENES AND HIS ASSOCIATES 23

However this may be, we can safely regard as authentic
the story of Diogenes' exile. Even in the fourth century,
when political life was less intense, exile was to the Greek a
great calamity. To be cut off from his friends, from his
familiar life, above all, to be deprived of his civic status,
was for the individual affected a searching test of character.
' Diogenes l would himself say that all the evils of tragedy
had alighted on his head, for he was without city or home,
cut off from his native land, a beggar and a wanderer, with
food for but a day.' Yet by this means was he led to philos-
ophy. 2 There is a curious and delightful story of the method
of his conversion which, as it derives from Theophrastus, may
well preserve a contemporary account. It says that Diogenes
was converted (noqov e^evqe rfji; TzeQiaraaeax;) by watching a
mouse running about, not looking for a place to lie down in,
not afraid of the dark, not seeking any of the things that are
considered dainties. 3 The precise date of his arrival at Athens
is uncertain : on the evidence adduced by Mr. Seltman it
cannot have been much earlier than 340 B.C. 4 If this date
is correct, it at once discountenances several features of the
traditional account of Diogenes. He cannot have been a
4 pupil ' of Antisthenes, who died not much after 366, he can
hardly have come into frequent contact with Plato. But it
in no way conflicts with our only reliable evidence : that of
Aristotle's Rhetoric, 5 that he was familiar in Athens as 6 KVWV
in about 330 : and the notice in Diogenes Laertius 6 (pre-
sumably from the Chronica of Apollodorus) that ' he was
an old man in the i i3th Olympiad ', i.e. 328-325. A passage of
Diogenes Laertius, 7 again probably derived from Theophrastus,
suggests that he arrived in Athens already a devotee of an
ascetic mode of life. ' For he wrote to a certain person to
buy him a cottage, and when there was a delay about it, he
took up his abode in a tub in the Metroon.' This episode
probably took place at the beginning of his stay in Athens :
later he seems to have slept in the porticoes of tempfes. The
view that Diogenes was already an ascetic at the time of his
arrival at Athens is also plausible in the light of his career.
For while at Athens he directed on the ideas and conventions

1 id., ib. 38. 2 id., ib. 49. 3 id., ib. 22.

4 See Note 4 to Chap. II. 5 Rhet., iii. x. 7.

D.L., vi. 81. 7 id., ib. 22,

24 A HISTORY OF CYNICISM

of the Greek nofas the most uncompromising criticism it
had ever known. The stringency of this attitude becomes
more understandable if it came from a penniless exile, already
devoted to an extreme form of asceticism, and originating
from the far ends of the Greek world.

Very few details of his life in Greece can be settled with con-
fidence. Eubulus' l story of his capture by pirates, and his sub-
sequent purchase by the Corinthian Xeniades, is convincingly
exposed by von Fritz 2 as an invention, perhaps originating with
the AioyevovQ nqaau; 3 of Menippus. Tradition connects his
name with other cities besides Athens. Perhaps he visited
Sparta ; he was at any rate an admirer of Spartan institutions. 4
Numerous stories connect him with Corinth ; Dio Chrysos-
tom 5 says that he alternated between Athens and Sparta as did
the Persian king between Sousa and Ecbatana ; other accounts 6
make Corinth the scene of his old age and death. Schwartz 7
is perhaps too drastic in regarding all the Corinthian stories
as false, and based on the Aioyevovq n^aou;. Our earliest
source, the passage derived from the Theophrastus 8 quoted
above, shows that Diogenes was accustomed to wear the garb
of the wandering beggar, and that he made journeys even in
his old age. Diogenes was a man with a mission ; as such,
he woulcf be most likely to visit the great games, with their
crowds of spectators from all parts of the Greek world. There
are anecdotes in existence which connect him with these fes-
tivals ; 9 he may well have visited Corinth in order to be
present at the Isthmian games. The date of his death is not
certain. The tradition (for which Demetrius 10 is quoted) that
he died on the same day as Alexander the Great, is pretty
clearly an invention. More trust may be placed in the state-
ment that he was an old man in the 113th 11 Olympiad (i.e.
328-325). Presumably he died some time after 320. Of the
manner of his death we hear most varied accounts, 12 some of
them obvious fabrications ; there is further divergence as
to whether it took place at Athens or Corinth. 13 A circum-
stantial account is given on the authority of Antisthenes of

1 D.L., vi. 30. 2 op. cit., pp. 22-6. 3 D.L., vi. 29.

4 AT., Rhet. y in. x. 7. 5 D.L., vi. 197. 6 D.L., vi. 77.

7 op. cit., p. 4. 8 D.L., vi. 22. 9 id., ib. 60 ; Julian, vii.
10 D.L., vi. 80. u id., ib. prob. from Apollodorus.

12 id., ib. 77-80. 13 id., ib. 77.

DIOGENES AND HIS ASSOCIATES 25

Rhodes l that it was in the gymnasium of the Craneion at
Corinth, and that Diogenes committed suicide by holding his
breath. Suicide of this kind is also alluded to in a fragment
of Cercidas of Megalopolis, 2 and is thus clearly an early Cynic
tradition. There is nothing inherently improbable in the story
that he died at Corinth ; the Corinthians 3 are said to have
carved a dog on his tomb, which was seen by Pausanias. 4
But whatever the place of his death, there is no doubt that
Athens is the most important scene for his life. The great
majority of stories about him introduce Athenian personages,
customs, and localities ; the inference clearly is that most of
his time was spent in Athens, the ' mother-city of philosophy '
in his day as for many years after.

Divergent traditions are also preserved about the writings
of Diogenes. Diogenes Laertius 5 first gives a list of 21 works
(14 dialogues and 7 tragedies), without quoting an authority. He
then says that * Sosicrates in the first book of his Successions, and
Satyrus in the fourth book of his Lives, allege that Diogenes left
nothjng in writing, and that the sorry tragedies (ret TQaycodaQia)
are by his friend Philiscus of Aegina '. Finally we have a list
on the authority of Sotion, which excludes the tragedies, and
gives the title of only five dialogues which occur in the first
catalogue. Diogenes Laertius 6 was particularly interested in
bibliography ; he gives bibliographies for 32 philosophers in
all, including all the leading Stoics mentioned. This last fact,
together with the evidence of Philodemus, 7 negircov Zrcotxcov,
gives a clue to the list of Sotion. From Philodemus we see
how the desire of the Stoics to link themselves up with Socrates,
and the * Succession ', Socrates-Antisthenes-Diogenes-Crates-
Zeno, involved the canonization of all these persons as Stoic
Saints. This left later Stoic moralists with some very awk-
ward matters to gloss over, particularly in connexion with the
Republic of Zeno, and the Republic and tragedies of Diogenes.
These works had been acceptable to the early Stoics :
Cleanthes 8 praised the Republic of Diogenes : Chrysippus 9

1 id., ib. 2 id., ib. 76. 3 id., ib. 78.

4 See Note 5 to Chap. II. 5 D.L., vi. 80.

6 Cf. Hope, op. cit., pp. 122-6.

7 Here. Pap., 155^, 330 : see Cronert, Kolotes und Menedemos,

8 Philo. d., col. xiii. 9 id., D.L., vii. 34.

26 A HISTORY OF CYNICISM

attested its genuineness and that of the Republic of Zeno.
But both works contained ' praises ' of cannibalism and incest,
and were highly unpalatable to the later Stoa. Naturally they
were a ready mark for the School's opponents ; * we see in
Philodemus how these assaults were parried. * Zeno was a
young man at the time, we must pardon youth 2 besides he
was not always Zeno, 3 he was once a mere nobody.' 4 As for
Diogenes, ' it [the Republic} was not his at all, but was written
by some evil-minded persons J . Now the same views of
cannibalism and incest were apparently to be found in the
tragedies, particularly the Oedipus and the Thyestes; 5 they
were accordingly declared not to be his at all, but by Philiscus
of Aegina, or according to Favorinus, Pasiphon. 6 The
tradition is reflected in Julian. 7

As for the tragedies of Diogenes, which are and are admitted to
be the composition of some Cynic the only point of dispute being
whether they are by the master Diogenes or his pupil Philiscus
what reader would not abhor them, and find in them an excess of
infamy surpassing that of harlots ? . . . We must judge ot the
attitude ot Diogenes to gods and men, not . . . from the tragedies
of Philiscus who by ascribing their authorship to Diogenes grossly
slanders that sacred person but from his deeds.

As the Republic and the tragedies are absent from the cata-
logue of Sotion, we may with confidence agree with von
Fritz 8 that this represents a Stoic redaction. The general
bowdlerizing which went on in the Alexandrian period in the
interest of morals is familiar from the ' athetized ' lines of
Homer ; there is an interesting passage of Diogenes Laertius 9
in which he apparently censures the bibliographers for not
doing their duty by an indecent passage of Chrysippus. The
view of Sosicrates and Satyrus represents a bolder type of
criticism which, not content with ' athetizing ' objectionable
works or placing them on an Index Expurgatorius, roundly
declare that no authentic works of the philosopher exist.

In conclusion, the inference is that the Republic and the
Tragedies were genuine works of Diogenes, as in all probability

1 von Arnim, Stoic vet. fr., i, 249-56.

2 Philod., col. xv. 5. 8 id., i. 15. 4 id., col. xvi.
6 id., col. vii. 6 D.L., vi. 73. 7 vii. 2iiE-2i2.
8 op. cit., pp. 55-7. 9 D.L., vii. 188.

DIOGENES AND HIS ASSOCIATES 27

were the dialogues mentioned in both catalogues, i.e. the
Cephalion, Pordalus, Aristarchus, and Eroticus. We are in no
position to pronounce about the authenticity of the remaining
works. 1

No materials are available for tracing any development in
Diogenes' theory or practice. He is presented to us as a
constant factor in the society of his day, criticizing conventional
values, exposing shams, unimpressed by reputation of any
kind. The stories of his highly disconcerting appearances a
in jthe lecture-rooms of the philosophers are probably apocry-
phal ; yet it is likely enough that few of them escaped his
criticism. The traditions that show him as a ' pupil ' of
Antisthenes have been shown to be late ; but they contain a
reflection of truth. For the conception of the ideal a expos, as
Socrates was portrayed by Antisthenes, contained potentialities
which as yet had not been realized. We have seen that the
chronological evidence makes it highly improbable that Dio-
genes can ever have come into personal contact with Antis-
thej^ps ; and the evidence of Aristotle shows that the school
in the Cynosarges was chiefly devoted to logical studies. It
is probable, then, that Diogenes was merely influenced by a
reading of Antisthenes' books, much as hearing Xenophon's
Memorabilia is said to have ' converted ' Zeno to philosophy.
He seems at any rate to have been impressed by Antisthenes'
theory of the ideal aocpot;, though denying that the author had
done much to put his theories into practice. 3 There is a
story, found in Aelian 4 as well as Diogenes Laertius, to the
effect that Plato used to say of Diogenes, * That man is
Socrates gone mad.' The story is at least ben trovato;
Diogenes represents the Socratic oro^og with its chief features
pushed to extremes. Frugality in him becomes strict asceti-
cism : elQcovela is represented by na^qr^aLa : aaxpQoavvr) by
dnaOela. The Socratic disregard of the opinions of the mob 5
becomes the Cynic avaideia. Like Socrates, Diogenes 6
contrasted the skill of the craftsman with the haphazard con-
duct of other human affairs ; like Socrates, again, his mission
was to exhort people not to care for money and moneymaking

1 See Note 6 to Chap. II. * D.L., vi. 40, 53, 39.

8 Dio Chrys., viii. 275 ; Stob., Flor. y xiii. 19.
4 D.L., vi. 54. Ael., xiv. 33. 6 Cf. Crito.

6 D.L., vii. 70.

28 A HISTORY OF CYNICISM

but for their own souls. But there was this difference
Diogenes was less hampered than Socrates by the ties of
family or civic life or the influence of national tradition.
Thanks to his exile he was wholly independent, Pythagoras'
spectator looking at the navriyvqu; of life. It was, he pro-
nounced, a world of fools : the standard of values was
completely distorted. ' He would often vociferate that the
gods had given men the means of living easily, but this had
been lost sight of because we require honeyed cakes, unguents,
and the like/ l Again, ' Things of value are bartered for what
is worthless, and vice versa. At all events, a statue fetches
3,000 drachmae, while a quart of barley-flour is sold for a
couple of copper coins/ 2 Or to revert to the metaphor of
Trapa^d^afeg, the conventional coin then in circulation was
bad, for it was falsely struck, without reference to a true
scale of value what was needed was that it should be defaced
and put out of circulation. The mission of Diogenes thus
became a thoroughgoing onslaught on convention, custom, and
tradition in all aspects. He endeavoured to convert men. to a
truer way of life, not, like Socrates, by dialectic, nor by allegory,
as did Antisthenes, but by the practical example of his daily
life. There is a story that his pupil Hegesias once asked for
the loan of one of the master's books. * You are a simpleton,
Hegesias/ was the reply ; * you don't choose painted figs,
but real ones ; yet you would pass over the true training
(TTJV dhrjOivfjv aaxrjcnv) and apply yourself to written rules.'
In different accents, it is the cry of St. Francis of Assisi, ' I
am your breviary, I am breviary.' In such a policy there was
no room for compromise ; it demanded absolute freedom in
speech, absolute fearlessness in deed. Hence na^Qrjala and
avaideia, twin qualities which later made Cynicism famous,
or at least notorious. ' naQqriaia is the finest thing in the
world,' Diogenes 3 is reported to have said. Its value to the
aocpos is clear ; it enabled him to resist the coercion of tyrants
and to expose the pretensions of * intellectuals ' and politicians.
Tradition is unanimous that Diogenes himself was remarkable
for his powers of ridicule and repartee. Anecdotes show him
in conflict with Antisthenes, Eucleides, Plato, and Aristotle
amongst the philosophers, with Demosthenes, Philip, Alex-
ander, Perdiccas, and Craterus among statesmen and * tyrants '.
1 D.L., vi. 44. a id., ib. 36. 8 id., ib, 35.

DIOGENES AND HIS ASSOCIATES 29

Few or none of these stories are likely to be authentic. Some
are obvious inventions for setting in opposition the Cynic
ao(jpo<; and the evil tyrant : or the man of common sense and
the ' sophist ' ; others involve chronological impossibilities.
The only certain example of his apophthegms is that quoted by
Aristotle * Taverns are the mess- tables of Attica.' 1 There
is little point in retailing any of the stories from Diogenes
Laertius ; they belong rather to an anthology of Greek humour
than a discussion of philosophy. 2

The counterpart of naQ^aia in speech is avaideia in
action. Again, one cannot verify any of the numerous anec-
dotes which illustrate this characteristic. Some merely offend
against Greek views of good manners, others against more
universal views of decency. We have no right to accept one
set and reject another. This quality of avaideia has been
shown to be the most likely origin of the nickname KVWV,
shamelessness being the peculiar characteristic of the dog,
according to the Greek view ; there is also the evidence of the
early\ Stoics, who seem to have approved or even practised the
qualfty, to the embarrassment of their successors. Again we
see the uncompromising nature of Diogenes. For him, what-
ever is ' according to nature ' is proper at all times and in all
places.

It was his habit to do everything in public, the works of Demeter
and of Aphrodite alike. He used to produce such arguments as
this. * If taking breakfast is nothing out of place (wdev ttronov),
neither is it out of place in the market-place. But taking breakfast
is nothing out of place, therefore it is nothing out of place to take
breakfast in the market-place.' 3

A typical bit of eristic reasoning ; we shall see again that
Diogenes employed such sophisms if they suited his turn.

1 Ar., Rhet. y iii. x. 7.

2 Perhaps I may here be permitted to record the personal impres-
sion that the stories about Diogenes are decidedly funnier than those
Diogenes Laertius tells about other philosophers. This may be due
to a variety of reasons. Perhaps some of the apophthegms, how-
ever they have later been * contaminated ' in detail, did originate with
Diogenes ; no doubt his reputation served as a magnet which would
attract to itself a good story ; lastly, the source of several such stories
may be Bion of Borysthenes, who himself possessed a pretty wit.

8 D.L., vi. 69.

30 A HISTORY OF CYNICISM

It is clear that his writings attacked custom, convention,
and tabu of every kind. Incest was defended as natural in
the Oedipus and Republic ; the doxographical portion of the
Life in Diogenes Laertius says that ' he saw nothing improper
in stealing from the temples, nor from eating the flesh of any
animal ; nor indeed in cannibalism, for one could find examples
of it amongst the customs of foreign nations '. Of course,
these statements cannot be taken at their face value to imply
that Diogenes recommended incest and cannibalism. We have
most of them on the authority of sources hostile to the Cynics,
and we do not know in what context they occurred in Diogenes. 1
The argument from foreign customs is familiar enough from
the fifth century ; we need only cite one of the antinomies of
the Aiaaol Ao'yoe, 2 which develop the theme VOJUOQ ndvrwv
fiaoihevQy to show that uahov and dta^Qov are the same. ' If
you brought together all the aia%Qa and put them in a big
heap . . . and assembled representatives of all people and
told them to take away only what is Kahov, you would have
nothing left.' Interesting is the argument with which <Dio-
genes is supposed to have justified cannibalism in the Thyestes. 3

According to right reason, as he puts it, all elements are contained
in all things, and pervade everything ; since meat is not only a
constituent of bread, but bread of vegetables ; and all other bodies
also, by means of certain invisible passages and particles, find their
way in and unite with all substances in the form of vapour. This
he says in the Thyestes . . .

This is clearly a bit of popularized Anaxagorean physics, and
it is strange to find it in Diogenes, who was so opposed to
the natural sciences. One's first reaction to the mention of
* vapour ' is to suppose that Diogenes may have been confused
with his namesake, Diogenes of Apollonia. But reference to
the Thyestes is quite explicit ; and when we consider the
' sophism ' by which Diogenes justified his habit of breakfasting
in public it seems likely enough that he would similarly seize
on a bit of popular science and exploit it for his own ends.
The point is important because it will reappear in a discussion
of Diogenes' educational theories.
The dvdtdeia of Diogenes was therefore didactic ; under-

1 See Note 7 to Chap. II.
2 In Diels, Frag. der. Vors\ 83, 18. 3 D.L., vi. 73.

DIOGENES AND HIS ASSOCIATES 31

taken to expose the artificiality of convention. The same
explanation may be adduced for his notorious eccentricities
how he went about in broad daylight with a lighted lantern, 1
looking for an honest man : how he would enter a theatre
when every one else was leaving it. 2 There is a good deal of
the showman about such actions ; they were done for propa-
ganda. Diogenes is said to have compared himself with the
trainers of choruses * who pitch the note too high that the
rest may get the right one ' 3 incidentally a sidelight on Greek
music. naQa%dQau; as such is negative in its immediate
results it invalidates a currency hitherto legal tender. But
this is subordinate to a positive purpose, to restore the true
currency which, according to the laws of economics, bad
money has driven out of circulation. Was Diogenes suffi-
ciently faithful to the metaphor of naQa^dqa^it; in all its
implications that he had a constructive, as well as a destructive,
side to his teachings ? The currency he sought to deface was
that which bore in any form the superscription of vo^oq ; we
can see whose superscription would have symbolized for
Diogenes the restored currency of <pvai<;. l He claimed that
he lived the same type of life as did Heracles, preferring liberty
to everything.' 4 The phrase rov avrov %aQaxrfj()a rov fiiov
suggests that we may be dealing with the actual words of
Diogenes; %aQaxT?)Q used thus is a numismatical metaphor.
The probability is increased by the fact that the sentence
occurs in the doxographical section of the biography, which
seems to depend on the writings of Diogenes. This opposi-
tion of VOJUOQ and (pvaiq, paramount in the thought of Diogenes,
had of course been one of the major issues of Greek philosophy
for more than a century. The two conceptions were so familiar,
the issue between them so clear-cut, that neither the Cynics
nor the Stoics apparently found it necessary to define exactly
what Kara yvoiv implied. Yet it is clear that <pvai<; has
greatly altered from its meaning in the idealogy of Ionian
science. Kaerst has said that (pvoiq for the Cynics was a
' universal, invariable rational norm ', 5 but perhaps * minimum '
is a term less liable to misunderstanding than norm. Strip
away all the accretions of convention, tradition, and social
existence, and what is left is Kara yvaiv. To take a modern

1 id., ib. 41. 2 id., ib. 35. 3 id., ib. 63.

4 id., ib. 71. 5 Gesch. des. Hell., ii. 103.

32 A HISTORY OF CYNICISM

analogy, a Commission of eminent doctors have recently
determined the minimum income on which a single man can
support life ; if their findings, X/- per week, can be regarded
as irreducible, then such a standard of living is in the Cynic
sense Kara, cpvaw. It is the ofi ovx &vev applied to human
affairs. Hence Diogenes' constant endeavour to reduce his
wants to the * natural ' standards ; hence appeals to the habits
of primitive man and of animals, who may be supposed to have
preserved that standard in its least corrupted form. We have
already seen how Diogenes considered the ways of the mouse
and was wise ; the sixth oration of Dio Chrysostom puts into
his mouth several such appeals to the example of animals.
They are at least in his spirit, though they cannot be proved
to be derived from any of his writings, and a sample may be
quoted :

Thanks to their delicacy men live a more wretched life than animals.
For apimals drink water, and eat plants, and mostly go naked the
year through ; they never enter a house nor use fire ; yet unless
they m^eet a violent end they live the span of life allotted by nature
to their\ species. . , . There are those who say that man cannot
live as do the other animals because his body is so delicate, and he
is hairless, unlike many beasts, and unprotected by fur or feathers,
and wit/nout a thick skin. Diogenes would retort that men are so
frail by reason of their mode of life, for they shun heat and cold
so fa.t as they can. Hairlessness is not of itself a disadvantage, he
woufrd instance frogs and other animals, whose bodies are much
softer than that of man . . . yet who in many instances live
throughout the winter in the coldest water. 1

T'hat ' life in accordance with nature ' brought happiness was
'fiis inevitable contention ; reinforced by the usual ascetic
argument that the ' very contemning of pleasure is in itself the
greatest of pleasures '. Confronted with the pleasure of the
life according to Diogenes, the reaction of Vhomme moyen
sensual must have been like that of the Victorian country
squire who, hearing of the somewhat insipid pleasures to be
provided for his entertainment in the next world, remarked
that he hoped he would be given grace to enjoy this sort of
thing when he got there. But Diogenes had a recipe for the
acquisition of grace it lay in cfcrwycrtc, * training ', in the

1 Dio Chrys., Or., vi.

DIOGENES AND HIS ASSOCIATES 33

stricter sense of the word. ' Nothing in life ', he maintained,
' can be brought to a successful issue without training, but
that alone is capable of overcoming everything.' l Hence he
used to roll in hot sand in summer and in snow in winter,
using every means of inuring himself to hardship (navra^oQev
lavrov ovvaaKQjv).* The theory of aaxrjau; is expounded
in more detail in the doxographical section of the Laertian
biography.

He would affirm that training is of two kinds, mental and physical ;
the latter being that whereby, with constant exercise, perceptions
are formed such as secure freedom of movement for virtuous deeds ;
and one half of this training is incomplete without the other, good
health and strength being equally included among the essential
things for the soul as for the body. 3

The whole passage is technical to a degree one does not associate
with Diogenes ; von Fritz thinks that it comes from one of
the Stoic compilations fostered on to him. But it can be
shown, that the theory of sensation and the dependent theory
of education were known in the fourth century : that the
interdependence of mental and gymnastic training was a
doctrine current in the circle of Diogenes : that Diogenes and
the contemporary Cynics would borrow scientific terms when
convenient. The inference is that, though the theories in the
passage cannot have been the inventions of Diogenes, they
may well have been expounded in his writings. 4

Stobaeus 5 shows how Diogenes allegorized the story of
Medea (presumably in the ' tragedy ' of that name) to exemplify
the virtues of

Diogenes said the Medea was a cro<p?/, and not a sorceress. For she
took over flabby men, whose physique had been ruined by luxury,
and by making them toil at gymnastic exercises and by sweat-baths,
she made them strong and healthy again. Hence arose the legend
that she boiled their flesh and made them into young men.

This insistence on aam]Oi(; and novoQ in education was of
course no new thing in Greece. For three hundred years the
young Spartans had been brought up on an emnovot; aaxqaig
which revolted the taste of Athens * we live at our ease, yet

1 D.L., vi. 71. 2 id., ib. 23. 8 Hicks* translation.

4 See Appendix II. 5 Flor., xxix. 92.

4

34 A HISTORY OF CYNICISM

we are ready to face the same dangers that they do/ 1 Hence
it is not surprising to find stories which show Diogenes as
an admirer of Sparta. * Where have you seen good men,
Diogenes ? ' he was asked. * Good men nowhere/ was the
answer, * but I have seen good boys at Sparta. ' 2 So too
asked, on his way from Sparta to Athens, whence and whither
he was going, he replied, ' From the men's apartments to the
women's/ 3 It was an admiration sometimes shared by Plato,
though elsewhere, particularly in the Laws, he criticizes the
Spartans for organizing their state for war as the be-all and
end-all, and Spartan education for only teaching one aspect
of virtue, namely courage, and only the less difficult parts of
that. But it is in Aristotle 4 that we find philo-Laconism
most explicitly condemned as obsolete.

The Spartans brutalize their children by their laborious exercises,
and do not attain their object, which is to make them virtuous.
When they alone were assiduous in their drill, they were superior
to others, but now they are beaten both in war and in the gym-
nasium. . . . We should judge the Spartans, not from what they
were, but from what they are ; for now they have rivals who
compete with them : formerly they had none.

But Diogenes' approval was presumably only of the method
of Spartan education. At Sparta more than any other city of
the Greek world, the State dominated the individual. Even
the Athens of the fourth century, which all the efforts of
Demosthenes failed to galvanize into its old political zest,
seemed too narrow to the devotee of avrdqueia ; assuredly
there was no place for the citizen of the world at Sparta. For
the cosmopolitanism of Diogenes does seem to have been a
new phenomenon. It is of course a truism to say that the
fourth century was an age when men felt the city-state
cramping : there had been amalgamations, federations, a
growing sense, as in Lysias and Isocrates, of the unity of the
Hellenic race : there had also been such sympathetic observers
of the * barbarian ' as Xenophon. But the cosmopolitanism
of Diogenes was not the well-travelled man's interest in alien
cultures, like that of Herodotus, but rather a reaction against
every kind of coercion imposed by the community on the

1 Thuc., ii. 39. I. 2 D.L., vi. 27. 8 id., ib. 59.

4 Politics, 13386, 20.

DIOGENES AND HIS ASSOCIATES 35

individual. c The only true commonwealth ', he maintained,
' is that which is as wide as the universe.' * Again, asked
whence he came, he replied with the famous word xoafjionohitris,

* I am a citizen of the world/ 2 It is essential not to read too
much into this profession. For us ' cosmopolitanism ' as a
conception carries an emotional colour which is the legacy of
Alexander, transmitted through the Roman Empire and the
Catholic Church. But as Tarn 3 says, the phrase as used by
Diogenes was one of negation, meaning, * I am not a citizen
of any of your Greek cities. ' Because he happened to enunciate
it at a period when Alexander was in fact trying to set up the
first * international state ', a great deal of speculation has grown
up about the possibility of Cynic influence on the great con-
queror. Such speculation generally makes much of the fact
that on Alexander's staff were two men who ' heard ' Diogenes,
Onesicratus and Anaximenes. Of itself this does not seem
convincing ; Alexander was not a man who took the advice of
others, either on military or political points ; and if he had
neglected the political ideas of the great Aristotle he was not
likely to attach much weight to those of two admirers of a
notorious eccentric of the Athenian streets. And in fact we
find no trace in Diogenes of those two great ideas which are
the pivots of Alexander's system the Brotherhood of Man
and the King as Living Law. Tarn shows that the conception
of the Brotherhood of Man in all probability originated with
Alexander, and is in direct contrast with the ' cosmopolitanism '
of the Cynics and early Stoics. When, a few years after the
death of Alexander, Alexarchus set up on Mt. Athos his little

* world-state ' of Ouranopolis, with its coinage on which the
King and his consort were symbolized by the sun and moon,
the citizens by the stars ; when Demetrius Poliorcetes wore a
robe on which were figured the hosts of heaven : they were
reflecting the conception that the universe is a common city
of gods and men. For Zeno, as Tarn says, it was a common
city of gods and wise men ; that this was true of Diogenes
seems likely from his contention that * all things are the property
of the wise : for all things belong to the gods, the gods are
friends to the wise : friends share all property in common :

1 D.L., vi. 72. 2 id., ib. 63.

8 * Alexander the Great and the Brotherhood of Man ', Proceedings
of the British Academy y xix, 1932.

36 A HISTORY OF CYNICISM

therefore all things are the property of the wise. ' * Between the
oocp6$ and the rest of the world a deep gulf is fixed ; and only
the aocpoc; is a member of the ogOr] nohrela ev Koajjia). We
have no early evidence that Diogenes was interested in king-
ship ; the ooyoq being sufficient unto himself would need no
overseer. It is only the literary Diogenes who appears, as in
Dio Chrysostom, as the monitor of Alexander. The historical
Diogenes is better reflected in the story of how, on hearing
that the Athenians had given Alexander the title of Dionysus,
he remarked, * Well, you'd better make me Serapis.' 2

All the best evidence for Diogenes emphasizes his insistence
on the avTaqxeia (self-sufficiency) of the individual. Philo-
demus, who attacks Cynic doctrines which mostly seem to
derive from the Politeia of Diogenes, says that * they [the
Cynics] attach no validity to any of the cities we know, nor to
any law '. 3 Cronert 4 mistakenly contrasts this with a passage
from the doxographical portion of Diogenes Laertius.

As to law : he would say that it is impossible for a society to exist
without law. For without a city no benefit can be derived from
that which is civilized : the city is civilized (darelov) : there is no
benefit in law without a city : therefore the law is something
civilized. 3

But as von Fritz 6 shows, there is no conflict between the
views if we remember that for Diogenes TO nofareveaOcu and
to doreiov were not desiderata, since they were not xard
tpvoiv. ' The privilege of the gods is to want nothing, and
of those like the gods to want but little.' 7

We can only get a disjointed idea of the other doctrines
developed in the Republic. Philodemus says that Diogenes
there discussed the uselessness of weapons, and agrees with
Athenaeus 8 that he advocated a bone currency. It seems
almost certain that the Republic of Diogenes, like that of Plato,
dealt with the position of women. They were to wear the
same dress as men, and to exercise nude in public, as at
Sparta ; 9 they were to be held in common. * The only mar-
riage he recognized was the union of the man who per-

1 D.L., vi. 72. 2 id., ib. 63. 3 Here. Pap., 339.

4 op. cit., p. 65, n. 318. 6 D.L., vi. 72.

6 op. cit., p. 59 seq. 7 D.L., vi. 104. 8 iv. I59C.

9 Here. Pap., No. 339, Col. ix.

DIOGENES AND HIS ASSOCIATES 37

suades with the woman who lets herself be persuaded. And
for this reason he thought that children should be held in
common/ l If Philodemus is throughout drawing on the
writings of Diogenes, we gather that intercourse was to be
permitted without restriction of place, person, or sex. 2 It
goes without saying that all distinctions of rank and birth
were to be abolished. Such appears to have been the * ideal
state ' of Diogenes. That it might be realized he carried on a
violent opposition, not merely to the customs and conventions,
but to the ordinary business of existing communities.

He would praise those who were about to marry and refrained,
those who intended to go on a voyage and never set sail, those who
thinking to engage in politics do no such thing, those also who
purporting to raise a family do not do so, and those who make
ready to associate with tyrants and yet never approach them
after all. 3

It is the extreme of individualism. To call it a political system
at all is doubtless a contradiction, unless we are prepared to
admit with Blake the possibility of a benevolent anarchy.

It would be an exaggeration to speak of any Cynic ' school '
in the regular sense of organized teaching and a common
body of doctrine. But Diogenes must have been a familiar
figure to every Athenian of his time : and no doubt many
persons listened to his discourses, if only out of curiosity.
* He was heard by Phocion the Honest and Stilpo of Megara
and many other political personages/ says Diogenes Laertius ;
with them may be counted Onesicratus of Astypalaea, who
was to play a not undistinguished part in the expedition
of Alexander. But in addition Diogenes does seem to have
gathered round himself a circle of disciples, who practised
the way of life he proclaimed. The circle was probably not
large ; as Diogenes said, * He was a dog whom all admired,
yet few dared go hunting with him. ' 4 Diogenes Laertius 5
gives the names of some half-dozen persons who presumably
belonged to this little group ; two of them seem to have
had nicknames, from which one gathers that they were well-
known eccentrics. By far the most famous was Crates of
Thebes ; there were also Hegesias, from Diogenes* own city

1 D.L., vi. 72. a Here. Pap., No. 339, Col. ix.

5 D.L., vi. 29. 4 id., ib. 33. 6 id., ib. 84.

38 A HISTORY OF CYNICISM

of Sinope and perhaps a close attendant of Diogenes, for he
was called * The Dog-collar ' (6 Khoioq], Philiscus of Aegina,
Menander * a great admirer of Homer ', called, we are not
told why, AQVfjtos (oakwood), Monimus of Syracuse, satirized
by Menander as carrying not one wallet but three, and per-
haps also Pasiphon and Androsthenes. What form Diogenes'
' teaching ' took is fairly clear. Music, astronomy, geometry,
dialectic, he had abandoned all ; J the discourses which he
delivered with such great persuasiveness 2 were no doubt in-
formal lectures on ethical subjects, enlivened by analogies from
the crafts and from the habits of animals, and illustrated by
quotations from Homer and the allegorical interpretation
of myths. Such discourses were the spoken precursors of
diatribe ; but that form of composition, later the best-known
Cynic literary genre, does not seem to have been employed by
Diogenes. The catalogues of his works given by Laertius
comprise only ' dialogues ' and ' tragedies ' the latter being
probably burlesque parodies, like the sixty * tragedies ' 3 attrib-
uted to Timon of Phlius, and bearing more resemblance to
the mime than to the drama proper. Parody and allegory
were of course familiar enough before Diogenes, and he does
not seem to have played any part in the development of those
genres which we shall find typical of later Cynic literature.

The influence of Diogenes during his own lifetime was
probably not great. Though Theophrastus thought it worth
while to write a book about him, the general attitude towards
him was most likely one of amused tolerance. But he was
to be of much greater significance in the succeeding century
than in his own. The reason for this is symbolized, probably
not intentionally, in one of the many stories about his death.
The romance of Eubulus told how he was asked in what
manner he wished to be buried. ' On my face,' he replied,
and explained that in a short time down was going to be
changed to up the reference is explained as being to the newly
gained supremacy of Macedon. 4 ret xdro) avco OTQeq)oOai
serves well as a description of the effects of the period of
the Diadochi, when the old city-state, and the ideals for
which it stood, long moribund, were finally buried. The
civilization fostered by the noTw; had had many of the char-

1 D.L., vi. 104. 2 id., ib. 76. 3 id., vii. no.

4 id,, vi. 31.

DIOGENES AND HIS ASSOCIATES 39

acteristics of a hot-house plant ; but now the greenhouse
was broken and the inmates exposed to the cold. Every-
where the individual found himself confronting an unfriendly
world, with no other refuge than his own resources could
provide. Bevan attributes the sketchiness of Stoic physics
to the sheer urgency of erecting some kind of defence to serve
men in their bitter need one does not dig foundations in a
hurricane. 1 Antisthenes had said that wisdom was the safest
wall, and that a fortress must be constructed in our own im-
pregnable reason. The metaphor of the fortress is frequently
echoed in Hellenistic philosophy. Crates found the island
of Pera, the Cynic Paradise, a safe refuge from a sea of
troubles ; the city of Diogenes, he said, was impregnable
before the attacks of Fortune. Fortune, Tyche, ruling deity
of the Hellenistic world, was the hostile power against whom
Philosophy now erected her castles. Designed by different
builders, her fortresses varied in complexity ; the earliest and
simplest of them all was that designed by Diogenes, and by
him most stoutly garrisoned.

(b) Diogenes' pupils : Onesicratus.

6 One of Diogenes' distinguished pupils/ according to Dio-
genes Laertius, was Onesicratus of Astypalaea. 2 His career
was one of considerable interest. A great admirer of Diogenes,
he later joined the expedition of Alexander, in which he
played a not unimportant part, being the pilot of the King's
ship, and chief navigating officer under Nearchus in the famous
voyage through the Persian Gulf. On his return to Greece
he wrote a work about Alexander, which Diogenes Laertius
implies was modelled on the Cyropaedia of Xenophon. His
book, we gather, was popular, and was seen by Aulus Gellius
on the book-stalls of Brundisium, together with those of
other romancers. Romance, indeed, appears to have been its
chief ingredient ' all Alexander's companions ', says Strabo
austerely, ' appear to have greater affection for fable than for
fact, but the stories of Onesicratus cap them all.' Never-
theless, Strabo cites him on the habits of the elephant, on
the banyan tree, on the great whales of the Southern Ocean,

1 Stoics and Sceptics, p. 32.

2 Fragments and references in Jacoby, Frag, d. Griech, Hist., 134
(1929).

40 A HISTORY OF CYNICISM

and on the far lands of Taprobane and Cathay. It is interest-
ing to see how he represented a sect of Indian fakirs as so
many Cynics, living the life of rcoVog, and holding beliefs
about a vanished Golden Age. Cynic, too, is the way in
which he writes of the simple virtues of savage races ;

of the country of Mousicanus he writes at some length, praising it
. . . saying that its inhabitants are known for their longevity (they
attain an age of a hundred and thirty years), and for their simple
and healthful life, despite the fact that their country offers abundance
of every commodity. They have public organizations for meals,
as do the Spartans. . . . They use neither gold nor silver, although
mines exist in their country. Instead of slaves they use the young
men in their prime, as do the Cretans with the Aphamiotae, and
the Spartans with the Helots. They cultivate no science except
that of medicine indeed, some Indian tribes consider highly
developed skill in the art of war and kindred subjects as positively
wicked. They have no laws except for the punishment of murder
and insolence. . . .

Onesicratus is not an important figure in the development
of Cynicism. He himself did not lead the XVVMOC; (3lo<; ;
yet more than any Cynic he was ' a wanderer over the face
of the earth ' ; and in discovering Diogenes' doctrines on the
banks of the Indus he shows how, in the minds of its admirers,
Cynicism is already not a school of philosophy, but a way
of life.

(c) Monimus.

In contrast with Onesicratus, Monimus of Syracuse appears
to have been one of the small coterie who lived after the
example of Diogenes. What little Diogenes Laertius says
about him apparently derives from Sosicrates ; and as it
makes use of the story of * the Sale of Diogenes ' is pre-
sumably untrustworthy as to detail. But it may be true that
Monimus was the slave of a Corinthian banker, who after
being driven out by his master took to the Cynic life. He is
said to have been a follower of Crates as well as Diogenes,
and was mentioned by Menander in the Groom, (a) * There
was once a certain Monimus, Philo, a wise man, but some-
thing too paradoxical. 1 (Ph.) You mean the man who carried

1 Allison thus renders ddo^oTSQog. Hicks translates * not so very
famous '.

DIOGENES AND HIS ASSOCIATES 41

the Wallet ? (a) The wallet ? Rather three Wallets ! l Yet
he never spake a word to match the saying " know thyself ",
nor such familiar watchwords. No, the squalid mendi-
cant surpassed them all, for he declared all human sup-
position to be illusion (TO ydq vno^cpOev rvcpov elvcu ndv
e<pri). From this illusory world Monimus turned to seek the
truth (e^QiQ^araroq eyevsro. ware (5o'f?/c xaracpQovelv, n@6<;
(5 J akr]0e(av naQOQ^dv). 9 Perhaps an indication of where he
found truth is to be derived from the statement that he
wrote two books nsql OQJLUDV ; which taken in connexion with
the phrase nqcx; dfajOeiav na^oq^idv suggests that truth was to
be found from the ' impulses ', or what we should call the
* instincts '. That vofioq has no validity because it violates
the natural instincts is one of the arguments used by Antiphon, 2
4 The law has laid down for the eyes what they should see
and what they should not, for the feet whither they should go
and whither not. . . .' A transgression of the Law of Nature
brings punishment, ov did dogav cLUa 61 dkrfleiav. That
truth should be found through the instincts would obviously
accord well with Diogenes' insistence on the life according to
Nature ; but probably the very scanty evidence will not admit
our being too definite in attributing this doctrine to Monimus.
The other writings assigned to him by Diogenes Laertius
are an Exhortation to Philosophy and some * humorous writings,
blended with covert seriousness J (naiyvia anovdfj hefyOvta
fjie/jLiy^va). This last term can cover a wide range of com-
positions, as is clear from the works of Crates, which con-
tained parodies of Homer, of elegiac verse, of hymns, and of
tragedy. TO anovdaioyehoiov 3 was of course the distinguish-
ing mark of Cynic literature ; Demetrius 4 says, * The moralists
often employ humorous forms of composition on suitable
occasions, as at festivals or banquets, and in attacks on luxury.
. . . Such is the manner of Cynic literature/ An example
of these yva>/mi is quoted by Stobaeus : 5 ' Monimus said
that it was better to lack sight than education. For under one
affliction you fall to the ground, in the other deep under-
ground (rov juev yd@ &!<; rov fidOgov, TOV <5' ei<; TO

1 Whence Allison deduces that he was a hunchback and also had
a paunch ! More likely the point is that he was greedy.

2 Ox. Pap., 1364, Vol. xi.

3 Strabo, xvi. 759. * Dem., de. el. 170. 5 ii. 13. 88.

42 A HISTORY OF CYNICISM

The diatribe was probably not to be found
among the naiyvia of Monimus ; but in the absence of
references little can be said about his works. They do not
seem to have had a great reputation, and it is significant
that there are no allusions to him in the remains of Teles.

(d) Crates.

A figure of far greater importance in the story of Cynicism
is that of Crates of Thebes. By later writers he was classed
with Antisthenes and Diogenes as the Cynics par excellence ; in
his own day he was referred to in the comedies of Menander
and Philemon, and apparently introduced as a character by
Antiphanes ; Zeno collected and published his apophthegms in a
work which is probably the source of most later anecdotes ;
he is referred to several times in the extant fragments of
Teles. Plutarch, always interested in any famous Boeotian,
wrote his biography, which apparently served as a source
for the references in the sixth oration of Julian. There are
allusions in Seneca, Epictetus, Athenaeus, Marcus Aurelius,
Demetrius, Gregory Nazianzen, and Origen. Finally there
is the biography by Diogenes Laertius, which quotes Zeno,
Menander, Eratosthenes, Diocles, Demetrius of Magnesia
Antisthenes of Rhodes, Hippobotus and Favorinus. Crates
played a greater part than Diogenes in the development of
Cynic literary genres, and the fragments l of his work which
survive are extensive enough to give the impression of a high
order of talent, particularly in the use of parody.

The evidence for the chronology and the events of his
life is scanty. He appears to have been a whole generation
younger than Diogenes, for his * floruit ' is given as the H3th
Olympiad (328-325), 2 in which Diogenes was an old man.
Tradition agrees that he was originally a man of wealth, but
renounced his possessions to take up the life of a Cynic.
Details of this renunciation vary ; the Cynic tradition is per-
haps that preserved by Diocles, 3 who says that on the advice
of Diogenes he gave up his farms to sheep-pastures, and
threw his money into the sea. If any trust may be placed
in the stories which show him already a Cynic at the time
of the destruction of Thebes by Alexander in 3 3 5, 4 we could

1 Collected by Diels in Frag. Poet. Phil. Grace, Vol. i (1901).

2 D.L., vi. 87. 3 id., ib. 87. 4 id., ib. 93.

DIOGENES AND HIS ASSOCIATES 43

infer that he came under the influence of Diogenes between
340-335. The rest of his life seems to have been spent mainly
in Athens. The account of his association with Zeno, and
with Demetrius of Phalerum after his fall in 30*7 y l suggests that
he lived through the last decade of the fourth century ; and
since he appears to have died in old age his death can hardly
have taken place much before 290. It is said that he was
buried in Boeotia.

If Diogenes is regarded as the embodiment of avrdqKeia
Crates may stand for that of (pihavOgcoma, variously sym-
bolized in the conceptions of the Cynic as the Watchdog, as
Doctor, or as Scout, working in the interests of humanity.
' He would go into any house J , says Plutarch, 2 ' and they
would receive him gladly and with honour, and hence he was
nicknamed the Door-Opener (0vQenavolxT?]c;), y * It was he ',
according to Julian, 3 ' who was the originator of the noble
doctrines of Zeno.' And they say that on his account the
Greeks would write over their doorways * Entry for Crates,
the Good Genius '. 4 Apuleius is more explicit.

Crates, the follower of Diogenes, whom the Athenians of his time
revered as a household deity (lar familiaris). No house was ever
barred against him ; however private the rooms of the head of the
family, Crates would enter it, and that most opportunely, for he
was the umpire and arbiter of all family disputes and quarrels.
Poets speak of the hero Heracles, and how by his valour he over-
threw wild animals, monsters, and giants, and rid the earth of
them ; our philosopher was in truth a very Heracles in contending
against Anger, Envy, Greed, Lust, and other plagues and evils of
the human soul. Of such pests would he free men's minds. . . .

It is the familiar comparison, so dear to the Cynics them-
selves, and which Lucian uses of Diogenes. ' Like Heracles,
I march and fight against lusts. ... I am the deliverer of
mankind and the healer of their woes/ But the methods of
Diogenes were harsh : * Other dogs ', he would say, * bite
their enemies, I bite my friends, for their salvation.' The
nature of Crates was much more genial ; possibly because he
had not suffered injustice as had been the lot of Diogenes.
' He passed his whole life jesting and laughing, as though

1 Plut., de. adul. et amic. 2 id., qu. con., ii. i. 6.

3 Or., vi. zooB. 4 ayaB^ daipovi, obelized in Teubner text.

44 A HISTORY OF CYNICISM

on perpetual holiday,' * says Plutarch his very reproofs were
delivered not with bitterness, but with kindliness a kindli-
ness which on one occasion pleasantly surprised Demetrius of
Phalerum.

We are less dependent on secondary sources for an esti-
mate of Crates than was the case with either Antisthenes or
Diogenes ; his teaching can be deduced from the extant frag-
ments of his own writings. Its lesson was that of a simple,
practical asceticism. * Prefer not the oyster to the lentil,
to bring us to confusion,' runs fragment 6 ; the moral is, as
Plutarch explains, * that luxury and extravagance are not the
least of the causes which produce revolution and tyranny in
cities '. Simplicity and Good Judgement must replace Luxury
and Extravagance ' Hail, Lady Mistress, the delight of the
wise, Simplicity, offspring of famed Prudence, those who
pursue the path of Justice honour thy virtue. ' 2 But asceticism,
and even philosophy, are not ends in themselves. They are
means to the supreme end, which is of course evdaiftovla,
or what was synonymous to the Cynic, dndOeca. Philosophy
should be pursued till we realize the worthlessness of d6a and
Ti/utf, which are both rvcpoq (illusion). Through asceticism
and * philosophy ' we may come to * the island of Pera ', the
Cynic paradise described in perhaps the best-known fragment
of Crates.

Fr. 4. 5. 6. (Diels)

There is a city, Pera, in the midst of the wine-coloured sea of
T#9?o, a fair and fruitful it is, and exceeding squalid/ owning
naught. Thither sails no fool nor parasite, no lecher whose delight
is in harlots, but it beareth thyme y and garlic, figs and loaves. For
such men fight not against each other, nor yet do they take up arms
for petty gain, nor for glory. . . . [fr. 5]. Free they are [i.e. the
inhabitants of Pera] from Lust the enslaver of men, they are unbent
by it : rather do they delight in Freedom, and immortal Basileia $
. . . [fr. 6]. She ruleth their hearts and rejoiceth in her own
possessions, no slave is she to gold nor to the wasting desires of
Love, nor to aught that has to do with Wantonness. 3

Such were the amenities of the island of Pera ; less lyrical
is fragment 12, ' thou knowest not what power the wallet brings,
and a quart of lupins, and caring for naught '. The philoso-

1 de. an. tranq., 4. 226E. 2 Fr.

3 See Note 8 to Chap. II.

DIOGENES AND HIS ASSOCIATES 45

phers of the schools were lost in rv(po$. ' rvcpoi; \ says Marcus
Aurelius, 1 * is a great deceiver ; it especially bewitches you
just when you think you are making headway on worthy
matters. For consider what Crates says about Xenocrates
himself ' presumably an allusion to the rvcpoi; of the master
of the Academy, though the remark is not quoted. On the
authority of Zeno, 2 we are told how

Crates was once sitting in a cobbler's shop reading aloud the
Protrepticus of Aristotle, which was written for Themison, the king
of Cyprus. Aristotle there says that no one possessed better
qualifications for philosophy than Themison, for he had ample
wealth to expend on it, and a great reputation as well. While
Crates was reading the cobbler listened attentively and at the same
time continued stitching, and Crates remarked to him, ' Philiscus,
I think I must write an " Exhortation to philosophy J> for you, for
I see you are better qualified than the man to whom Aristotle
dedicated his book.'

Fragments i and 2 are an attack on the Megarians.

(i) Yes, and Stilpo too I saw, suffering bitter woes, in Megara, a
where they say is the bed of Typhon. Endlessly did he dispute,
and many a comrade was round him. They wasted time in the
verbal pursuit of Virtue. ^ ... (2) and I saw Asclepiades the
Pheliasian and the bull of Eretria (Menedemus). 3

A passage of Teles 4 attributes to Crates an attack on Hedonist
doctrines which is interesting both in its content and as a good
example of the lively style of Cynic moralizing :

If we must judge the happy life [says Crates] by a favourable
balance of pleasures, then no man will be truly happy. For if you
choose to consider the several stages of a man's life, you will readily
see that there is an overwhelming preponderance of pain. First
of all, half of our entire life, the portion spent in sleep, is indifferent.
Then the first stage, that of infancy, is exceedingly trying. The
child is hungry, and the nurse tries to rock it to sleep ; it is thirsty,
and she washes it : it would like to go to sleep, but she makes a
row with the rattle. Should it escape the nurse, it gets into the
hands of the tutor, the trainer, the schoolmaster, the music master,
the painter. Advance a stage, and up comes the teacher of mathe-

1 vi. 13. 2 Apud Strabo, 95, 21.

3 See Note 9 to Chap. II. 4 Hense, p. 38, 3.

46 A HISTORY OF CYNICISM

matics, the geometrician, the riding-master ; the boy has to be up
with the dawn, never a moment's spare time. And now he is an
eplxebos : now he goes in fear of the prefect, the trainer, the drill-
sergeant, the master of the gymnasium, by all of whom he is beaten,
bullied and hustled about. If there are watches to be kept the
ephebi must keep them : if there are guard-duties they perform
them : if there are transport operations, they must embark on
them. Now the youth has come to man's estate, he is in his prime.
He goes on military expeditions and embassies on behalf of the
State : engages in political life, is strategus, choregus, agonothetus.
He lauds the days when he was a boy. Time goes on, he comes
to be an old man. Once more the attendant lies in wait for him :
he longs for his youth : quotes Euripides, ' Youth is ever sweet to
me, Old Age lieth heavier than Etna.' So I can't see how anyone
can live a happy life, if one is to judge from the criterion of a
favourable balance of pleasures. 1

The diatribe of Teles which uses this passage is entitled negi
TOV //?) elvat, reA,o<; rjdovtfv. A work of Chrysippus on the
same subject is thought to have been an attack on Epicurus ;
but from the nature of the hedonist doctrines here assailed it
seems likely that we have to deal with the views attributed in
Diogenes Laertius to Aristippus. As has been said, the * end '
for the Cynics was evdai^ovia^ which is equated with
avTaQxeia. Aristippus 2 substituted for this that rjdovrj against
which Diogenes had marched ' like another Heracles '. De-
throned from the position of TO r^Aog, evdai^ovia was defined
by Aristippus in a way which was most repugnant to the
Cynics. The end being the * individual * pleasure (rj Kara
/LieQot; rjdovrj) evdai^ovia is the sum-total of all ' individual '
pleasures, in which are included pleasures both of the past and
of the future. Further, evdaijuovla is desirable not for its
own sake, but for the sake of the particular pleasures. This
doctrine was attacked on similar grounds by Hegesias. His
followers

denied the possibility of happiness [i.e. as defined by Aristippus],
for the body is afflicted with much suffering, in which the soul
shares and is thereby disturbed. Moreover, expectations are
frequently upset by Fortune. From all of which it follows that
happiness cannot be attained. 3

1 See Note 10 to Chap. II. a D.L., ii. 87, 88.

8 id., ib. 93, 94,

DIOGENES AND HIS ASSOCIATES 47

Cicero l says that in a book of Hegesias entitled " AnoxaQregtiv
the story is narrated of a man who was committing suicide
by fasting, and who, when his friends tried to dissuade him,
replied by enumerating the evils of life (vitae humanae
enumerat incommoda). The controversy is reflected in two
epigrams of the Anthology,* in which the * evils of life '
are set out by Posidippus, and the good things of life by
Metrodorus.

The standards of the ordinary man were of course no less
afflicted with rv<po$ than those of the dogmatists. ' He used
to say that it is impossible to find anybody wholly free from
flaws ; but, as in a pomegranate, one of the seeds is always
going bad/ 3 Popular standards of values were satirized in the

* famous day-book ' (rj ecprn^sQiQ ry Ogv^ov/tevr]) : 4 apparently
an ironic picture of a wealthy man's account-book.

* Set aside ten minas for a chef, a drachma for the doctor.
Five talents for a flatterer, for council smoke. A talent for
a whore, three obols for a philosopher/

In strong contrast to these distorted standards were the

* natural ' values of the KVVIKOQ /9tog. The simplicity and
frugality of Crates' own life are attested by the fragments of
his work as well as the evidence of his follower Metrocles.
' Gather lentils and beans, my friend ; if you do this you will
readily set up a trophy of victory over Want and Poverty.' 5
Elsewhere Poverty appears as the friend rather than the
enemy. ' I am a citizen of the lands of Obscurity and Poverty,
impregnable to Fortune, a fellow-citizen of Diogenes.' a
Satisfied with his quart of lupins, he could care for naught.
Though deformed and a hunchback, he appears to have prac-
tised the aaM]ai<; of gymnastics which Diogenes so empha-
sized. 7 In a passage of Teles Metrocles contrasts the expensive
life of a student at the Academy or under Theophrastus with
the simplicity of a disciple of Crates.

Metrocles says, that when he studied under Theophrastus and
Xenocrates, though he had a liberal allowance from home, he was
actually afraid of starvation, and was constantly in a state of want
and penury. But when he transferred to Crates, he could have

1 Tusc., i. 83. 2 ix. 359, 360. 8 D.L., vi. 89.

4 id., ib. 85. 6 Fr. 7. c D.L., vi. 93.

7 id., ib. 92.

48 A HISTORY OF CYNICISM

maintained a second person besides himself without any allowance.
For formerly it was essential to have sandals ... a cloak, a retinue
of servants, a well-furnished household, to contribute to the common
table fine wheaten bread, dainties above the common level, sweet
wine, and to furnish the entertainments which came his way.
Such a mode of life was there considered liberal. But when he
changed over to become a follower of Crates there was none of that.
Living on a much simpler scale he was satisfied with a rough coat
and barley-bread and common herbs, and felt neither regret for
his former mode of life nor dissatisfaction with that of the present.
... If he wished to anoint himself, he would go into the baths
and use oil-lees ; sometimes too he would go to the furnaces of the
smithies, roast a sprat, mix a little oil, and sit down and make his
breakfast. In summer he would sleep in the temples, in winter
in the baths. Yet there was none of his previous want or penury,
he had sufficient for his circumstances, and felt no desire for
attendants.

Yet there are not wanting indications that with Crates the
austerity of Diogenes was to some extent relaxed. It is note-
worthy that no anecdotes portray him as a beggar : possibly
he had not renounced all his wealth. One account, quoted
from Demetrius of Magnesia, says that he deposited his money
with bankers to be paid to his sons if they were ordinary men
(idia)Tai)j but to be distributed among the people if they became
philosophers, for then they would want nothing. Now we
have the authority of Eratosthenes for the statement that his
son, Pasicles, went through the ephebate, and as he is not
mentioned as a disciple of Crates, it is possible that as an
' ordinary man ' he claimed his legacy. No doubt the genial
nature of Crates himself is mainly responsible for the relaxing
of the rigid standards of Diogenes which appears in fragment
10, the parody of the prayer of Solon.

Muses of Pieria, fair children of Olympian Zeus and of Memory,
hearken to my prayer. Give me food day by day for my stomach,
but give it without slavery, which makes life poor indeed. . . .
May I be rather useful than agreeable to my friends. Little desire
have I for famous riches : no craving do I feel for the wealth of
the Beetle, nor the substance of the Ant. But I wish to attain a
portion in Justice, and to amass such wealth as may easily be borne,
is easily acquired, and precious for Virtue. If I may attain to this,
I will worship Hermes and the holy Muses, not with costly offerings,
but with pious deeds.

DIOGENES AND HIS ASSOCIATES 49

A passage of Teles * seems to suggest that Crates did not
insist on complete renunciation of wealth from his followers.

Crates replied as follows to the question, ' What shall it profit me
to become a philosopher ? ' * You will be able to open your purse
readily and to dip your hand therein, not as now, fumbling and
hesitating and trembling, like a paralytic. With equanimity you
"will see it full, and without regret empty, you will be equipped to
employ money readily when prosperous ; but if penniless, you will
not be harassed by longings for it. Your life will be one adapted
to meet the situation, with no cravings for what you do not possess,
and undisturbed by the vicissitudes of chance.'

Probably such lessons were meant for the wider circle of the
hearers of Cynic discourse rather than for the devotees of the
Cynic life. Nevertheless, the attitude suggests, rather than the
austerity which Diogenes undeviatingly maintained to the end
of his life, the remark of Aristippus on his association with
Lais. 2 * I have Lais, not she me : it is not abstinence from
Pleasure which is best, but to master it without being
worsted/

Through his association with Metrocles Crates was drawn
into a relationship which caused great amazement in antiquity
his xvvoya/Ala 3 with Hipparchia. The marriage seems to
have been a historical fact ; it is mentioned by Diogenes
Laertius, Suidas, and Apuleius in almost identical terms,
which suggests that their accounts are based on a common
source. This would not in itself be valuable evidence, but
there is also a quotation from the Didumi of Menander, an
epigram on Hipparchia by Antipater of Sidon, and a very
striking passage of Epictetus. Exactly how the marriage came
about we do not know. Probably Metrocles sent word to his
family in Maroneia of how much happier he was as the follower
of Crates than as a student at the great schools, perhaps he
warmly eulogized his new master. But at any rate his sister
Hipparchia, whose name suggests that she was of good family,
fell violently in love with Crates, refused to consider her
younger and more eligible suitors, and threatened to commit
suicide unless she were allowed to marry him. To judge from
the evidence of literature, young women were seldom so
strong-minded in Greece. The idea that * Virtue is the same

1 Hense, p. 28, 5. 2 D.L., ii. 75. 3 See Appendix III.
5

Jo A HISTORY OF CYNICISM

for women as for men ' admittedly goes back to Socrates, it
was adopted by Antisthenes, and developed by Plato in the
Republic. As we have seen, Diogenes proclaimed that there
should be no distinction of dress between the sexes, and that
women should conduct their athletic exercises in public just
as men did. But the theory had never been put in practice
so literally as was now proposed by Hipparchia. The girl's
parents appealed to Crates to dissuade her ; ' he did all he
could, and finally failing to convince her, got up, took off his
clothes in front of her, and said : " This is the bridegroom,
here are his possessions ; now make your choice. You will
never be a helpmeet of mine, unless you share my pursuits/' *
This final argument failed, and Hipparchia had her way. A
precise date for this marriage cannot be determined. Since
Metrocles studied at the Lyceum under Theophrastus before
he became a Cynic, it must have been some time later than
323, when Theophrastus became head of the Peripatetic School.
The only other evidence is that of Menander : a fragment of
the Didumi speaks of Crates having a daughter of marriage-
able age. Menander died c. 291 ; of the date of the Didumi
nothing is known. But from the nature of the reference the
marriage of Crates and Hipparchia must have taken place
some fifteen years or more before the production of the play,
i.e. probably earlier than 310. The evidence thus points to
some time in the decade following 320 as the date for the

Hipparchia became a famous figure, ' she was nicknamed
" the female philosopher ",' says Diogenes Laertius, ' and
countless stories were told about her/ She was not the first
woman who had adopted philosophy : one thinks immediately
of Aspasia and her famous ' Salon ' : we also hear of two
women, Lastheneia of Mantinea and Axiotheia of Phlious, as
being pupils at the Academy. Aristippus, too, is said to have
instructed his daughter in the hedonist doctrines. The fame
of Hipparchia is to be explained partly by the constancy with
which she adhered to the Cynic asceticism, * she went every-
where with Crates, wearing the Cynic garb ', partly by the
opportunities Cynic sexual morality gave to the inventors of
scabrous stories. It is worth noting that lurid stories of the
nuptials of Crates and Hipparchia appear only in Apuleius :
they are absent from the earlier accounts. They may there-

DIOGENES AND HIS ASSOCIATES 51

fore be dismissed with great probability as inventions,
Hipparchia being chosen as a stock figure on which to fasten
examples of dvaldeia. A more curious and interesting com-
ment on the marriage is that made by Epictetus. 1 In the
essay ' On the Calling of the Cynic ' it is maintained that in
the present order of things the Cynic will not marry or rear
children, for that will interfere with his duties as the messenger,
the scout, the herald of the gods that he is. If he marries

he must get a kettle to heat water for the baby . . . wool for his
wife . . . oil, a cot, a cup, and many other pieces of crockery. . . .
What then will become of the King, whose duty it is to be overseer
over the rest of mankind who have married ; who have had
children : who is treating his wife well, who ill : who quarrels :
which house stands firm, which does not ; making his round like
a physician feeling pulses. See to what straits we are reducing
our Cynic, how we are taking his kingdom away from him.

* Yes,' comes the objection, * but Crates married ' Crates the
lar familiaris, the public consultant, the best example of this
kind of labour in the interests of humanity. The answer is
very odd.

You are mentioning an instance of passionate love : besides, you
are assuming another Crates in the person of the woman. Our
inquiry is concerned with ordinary marriage, apart from special
circumstances : which from our standpoint do not at present seem
to concern the philosopher.

Similar language is used by Diogenes Laertius.

She fell passionately in love with Crates' discourses and ways of
life (rJQa KQarrjTos xal r&v hoywv xal TOV fllov) . . . she threatened
to commit suicide unless she were given in marriage to him. To
her Crates was everything ... he tried to dissuade her, but her
sincerity overcame him. 2

It is another instance of Greek feeling of helplessness in the
face of passionate love ; "Eqax; av MOLTS [td%av, unconquerable
even by the Cynics, who can only offer as palliatives Hunger
and Time ; if these fail, the only course is to use the Rope.
Physical intercourse would have been perfectly in accord with
Cynic sexual morality ; if Diogenes had permitted tor neioavra

1 iii. 22, 76. 2 D.L., vi. 96.

52 A HISTORY OF CYNICISM

tr\ neioQelofl avvelvai, why should not the roles of the sexes
equally well have been reversed ? It was the element of
passion in the marriage, and its permanence that astounded
the Greeks. ' She even went out to dinner with Crates *
a thing only done, to use the Victorian phrase, by women
of a certain class. naqa^aQarmv to vo^iv^a, the slogan of
Diogenes, was followed by Crates and Hipparchia not only in
their marriage, but also in the education of their children.
According to Menander, Crates himself claimed that * he gave
his daughter in marriage for a month on trial ' ; and on the
authority of Eratosthenes we learn that he took his son Pasicles
into a brothel and said, ' That is how your father married.'
The marriage of Hipparchia and Crates affords one of the
strangest and most interesting examples of Greek sexual
morality.

Of Crates' influence on philosophy through his association
w jt]i Zeno, and on literature through the part he played in
the development of Cynic genres, we shall have occasion to
speaif later. But in one direction it is hard to evaluate his
influejf 106 > I mean his services as a * public consultant ' to the
Atheni| an people. In the latter half of the fifth century the
ordinarY man at Athens was to a remarkable degree thrown
on his- own resources in the conduct of his affairs. The laws
of th^ State, of course, laid down certain limits which could
not toe transgressed without punishment ; but in that very
imp ortant section of human affairs which does not come within
the/ province of the law, but on which happiness so largely
d^{>ends, the average man had no guide. Religion could
satisfy his craving for ritual in the State ceremonies, or provide
emotional stimulus in the Mystery Cults, but it gave no advice
on the conduct of his everyday affairs. The two great schools
of Philosophy, the Academy and the Peripatetics, were scholarly
and scientific in spirit, dominated by the Platonic conception
ddvvarov nA.fjOo<; <pMao<pov etvai ; Theophrastus warned his
pupils that the mastery of his doctrines would demand a world
of labour. For his recurrent problems, so trivial in the general
scheme of things, so important to him, the ordinary man could
derive about as much help from them as could his modern
equivalent from the Cavendish Laboratory. For help he had
to have recourse to oracles or the interpretation of dreams, or
to the advice of his friends (it is interesting to see how ancient

DIOGENES AND HIS ASSOCIATES 53

discussions of friendship always insist that to give helpful
advice is the most important function of a friend). But oracles
were sometimes expensive and generally ambiguous ; while
probably your friends often knew little more than you did
yourself. The value of advice from a man like Crates, himself
detached from the ordinary business of life, would be that it
was impartial, clear, and related to a known standard of values.
We may picture him doing much what Socrates is made to do
in the Memorabilia, preaching the virtues of agreement between
brothers, pointing out the advantages of self-control to those
who seemed much in need of it. Philosophy brought to the
masses inevitably differed from the Philosophy of Plato and
Aristotle ; from the noble quest to satisfy the curiosity of the
intellect it has descended to become Daily Strength for Daily
Needs. To us Crates, the cheerful hunchback, who renounced
his wealth, made one of the few successful love-matches known
in Greek literature, and had a talent for literary parody, is a
pleasant and interesting figure ; for the life of the average
Athenian of his day he was perhaps more important than
Theophrastus or the learned professors of the Academy.

NOTES TO CHAPTER II

i. The most important is necessarily the biography by Diogenes
Laertius an extraordinary piece of uncritical exuberance. One of
the longest Laertian biographies, it contains anecdote heaped upon
anecdote, frequent repetitions, two or more accounts of the same
event, all strung together in an inconceivable disorder of which von
Fritz rightly complains. The Florilegium of Stobaeus contains
numerous apophthegms under the name of Diogenes ; similar dicta
are attributed to him by Epictetus, Maximus of Tyre, and Julian,
and, less frequently, by Athenaeus, Aelian, and Plutarch. As a
literary figure, he appears in the works of Dio Chrysostom and
Lucian. Nine anecdotes, only one of which is retailed by Diogenes
Laertius, appear in a papyrus of the first century B.C., 1 and five
apophthegms in what seems to be an Egyptian school copybook of the
third or fourth centuries A.D. 2 Much more important are the frag-
ments of Philodemus, 3 On the Stoics, which give evidence for the
contents of Diogenes' Politeia.

1 The so-called * Wiener Diogenes-papyrus *, vide Cronert, Kolotes
und Menedemos, p. 49.

2 Papyrus Bouriant, n. i : Cronert, op. cit., p. 157.

3 Hercul. Pap., Nos. 155 and 339 : ib., pp. 53-67.

54 A HISTORY OF CYNICISM

2. Von Fritz divides the Life as follows : cap. 1-24 form a biography,
probably based by D.L. on a single original ; cap. 25 opens with
the sentence deivog r 9 ?\v xaraoo^aQevaaaOai T&V d'AAcov, and cap.
25-69 are filled with a series of anecdotes, most of which illustrate
this characteristic ; cap. 70-3 contain %Qeiai, in all probability
from the same source as the biography above, c. 74 begins eticero-
%a)Ta.Tos (5* eyevETo EV TGC% anavtr\G&Gi TCDV hoycov, cog Sfjhov E fad
nQoeiQrjxajuov. and thus may link on to cap. 25-69 ; the cap.
74-fin. contain additions inserted by Diogenes Laertius himself an
epigram of his own composition, the date of Diogenes' death, a
discussion of the writings attributed to him, and a list of namesakes.
There are then two main portions, the Biography and the Collection
of Anecdotes. The second of these depends largely on Cynic and
Stoic sources, while the first derive from general literature as well.
Thus analysed, the Life by Laertius is our chief source for Diogenes.

3. Mr. Seltman 's evidence is here briefly reproduced. Sinope, as the
most important city of the Euxine, issued an uninterrupted succession
of good coinage throughout the fourth century. This falls into three
issues the first 1 covering the years prior to 370 (obverse a nymph's
head, reverse eagle on a dolphin, the letters ZINQ and two or more
letters of a magistrate's name), the second 2 37-362 when Sinope was
under the control of the Satrap Datames of Dascylium (same as
above, except that ZINQ is replaced by AATAMA), the third 3 362
to at least 310 (same as first issue, except that there is often an
aplustre in front of the nymph's head). Nine coins 4 are listed in
the Recueil Ge*ne*ral des Monnaies Grecques d'Asie Mineure which
bear as the name of the magistrate the letters IKEEIO, and which
belong to the third series. Some time after 362, then, a magistrate
of the same name as that given for the father of Diogenes was actually
in charge of the Mint at Sinope. What of naQa%aQa%i(; ? Besides
the three issues of good Greek coins, we find a large number of alien
imitations of the currency of Sinope. Mr. Seltman cites 37 coins
with Sinopean types but the Aramaic legend Ariawrath, and 18 with
the Aramaic letters ABDSSN, or 55 coins in all. ARIAWRATH
must be Ariarathes, satrap of Cappadocia between 351 and 333.
Besides the coins bearing Aramaic legends B which Mr. Seltman shows
cannot have been minted at Sinope, we have 40 specimens of a
barbarous imitation 6 of a Sinopean type, with blundered Greek
letters. The inference is clear.

During the decade after 350 the credit of Sinope was being seriously
undermined by the circulation of imitations of her currency, eman-
ating notably from the satrap of Cappadocia. What action was taken
to meet the situation is readily seen. Of the 55 coins with Aramaic
legends 31 (or about 60 per cent.), of the 40 barbarian coins 8 (or
20 per cent.), have been defaced by a large chisel-stamp. This was

1 R.G., No. 20. 2 id., No. 216. 3 id., Nos. 21, 21, 22, 23.

4 id., p. 193. 5 id., Nos. 33-360. 6 id., No. 24.

DIOGENES AND HIS ASSOCIATES 55

done to put them out of circulation ; and is, Mr. Seltman argues,
naQa%aQat;i<; in the true fourth-century sense. (The word was a rare
one, it cannot mean the issue of false coinage, the word for which
was ncLQaxonrew, and besides no Sinopean coins of base metal are
known.) The work must have been that of a high official at the
Mint, it exactly coincides with what we are told about Diogenes'
father Hicesias. Hicesias, then, was a ' sound money man ', he acted
in the best interests of the State ; why did he suffer imprisonment ?
Mr. Seltman has two suggestions. After the control of Datames at
Sinope from 370 to 362 there was probably a pro-Persian party in
the city, which could easily say that the na^a^dqa^ic, of the coins of
the Cappadocian satrap was an insult which would probably lead to
trouble. Furthermore, the na.Qa%dQai<; was not confined to the
imitation currency : of the good Sinopean coins, 2 out of 43 listed
of the first issue, 10 out of 130 of the third issue have been so defaced.
This was probably due to carelessness on the part of under officials,
but it could easily be turned into a serious accusation against the
Master of the Mint. So for one or both of these reasons Hicesias
was imprisoned, and his son Diogenes, who was an assistant at the
Mint, was driven into exile.

4. Ariarathes did not become satrap of Cappadocia till 351 ; as 40
per cent, of his issues have not been ' paracharacted ', the inference
is that this measure was not taken till the issue had been going on
for some years.

5. The whole tradition is rejected by von Fritz, 1 who says that it is
* incredible ' that the Corinthians should not have written an epitaph
for the tomb, or that Diogenes Laertius should not have retailed it
if they had. Again, the scepticism seems too dogmatic ; we have
no means of settling the point : the only epigram in the Anthology a
which refers to the dog on the tomb is anonymous and undated.

6. Von Fritz* 3 attempts to show that the neql aQerfji;, TISQI dyaOov,
and Philiscus are Stoic compilations are not convincing ; the first two
could well be alternative titles for dialogues in the early catalogue ;
either for instance would fit the tiyyr\ rflixri. Von Fritz objects to
the Philiscus because, * There is no analogy in antiquity for a philos-
opher to name a dialogue after one of his pupils.' But Theaetetus
was a member of the Academy, though perhaps rather a fellow-
student than a pupil of Plato. (Aristotle wrote a Eudemus named
after a fellow-student, Eudemus of Cyprus.) 4 The dialogue in the
list of Sotion entitled * Casandrus ' can hardly be by Diogenes if it
refers to the Macedonian successor of Alexander, who did not come

1 op. cit. * Anth. Pal., vii. 64.

3 op. cit., pp. 55 and 57.

4 Stilpo is said to have written a dialogue entitled * To his daughter ',
D,L., ii, 120.

56 A HISTORY OF CYNICISM

into prominence till after Diogenes' death. But further speculation
on the authenticity of the remaining works is not of great value ;
the list we have inferred to be genuine includes all writings which
later authorities explicitly quote for the sayings of Diogenes.

7. Professor Taylor reminds me that if Book V of the Republic were
only known to us from similar sources we might imagine that it was
' in praise ' of Free Love, and that the attacks of Sextus Empiricus
on * shocking ' tenets of Zeno and Chrysippus merely show that the
early Stoics were fond of discussing * extreme * cases.

8. a The history of the word rv<poQ is interesting. Primarily of
course it simply means * smoke ' or ' vapour '. The associated verb
rv<p6o), according to Liddell and Scott, is only used in the metaphorical
sense * to be puffed up ', with conceit. There are two implications in
the metaphorical use of rwpos inflation, and obscurity. The second
seems to have been the earlier usage ; for the Hippocratean writings
described the delirium produced by fever as rvqpos : hence * typhoid '
fever is a fever that darkens or * clouds ' the brain. But the word
is uncommon before fourth-century prose ; c5 terv^o^eve, ' deluded
fellow ', occurs in the Hippias Major ; Aristotle calls the bewildered
stage of drunkenness rvyoq ; Demosthenes in several passages uses
TeTV(pa)ju,evo$ to mean * deluded, misled '. With the Cynics rv<pog
became almost a technical term. The twofold implication was re-
tained : the opponent of the Cynics was * puffed up ' and arrogant
(cf. the Cynic story of how Diogenes trampled on the fine carpets
of Plato * with conceit of another kind, Diogenes ', was the reply ;
and the similar story of Antisthenes) ; all doctrines except the Cynic
dotjai were obscure and illusory. Menander makes Monimus say
that the whole of supposition is an illusion. In our passage, rvcpos
refers to the obscurity of false beliefs and illusory sense impressions.

Reading JIEQIQQVTIOQ with Stephanus. Diels follows Rieske in
reading neQiQQVToi;, which admittedly reproduces the wording of
Homeric lines.

iiq, yai ecrri jUEcrq) en oivom novrq)
KaXt] wai meiga, jifQtgQVTos, etc.

but seems to have little force. mQigQvnoc, would be used naqanqoadoK
like Twpq> in the previous line, and is an apt reference to the well-
known squalor of the Cynic life. Menander called Monimus 6
TiQOcraiTcbv xai gvn&v.

y The pun of 6vfj,o<;, ' Thyme ', and Ovpog, ' strength ', is not to
be accurately rendered in English. Perhaps one might say ' heart-
sease '.

5 Reading with Diels dOdvarov flaaiheiav ; Wilamowitz reads
dOavdratv fiaffiAelav, ' rejoicing in the rule of the immortals ', but
this is not specifically Cynic and overlooks the role played by paoihela
in Cynic conceptions. /3aatfata personifies the Cynic self-mastery,
as opposed to the condition of a man dominated by Lusts, who is

DIOGENES AND HIS ASSOCIATES 57

under a rvqavviq. The whole conception is well illustrated in the
famous story of Heracles in Dio Chrysostom, 1 which Weber and
Francois regard as based on Cynic originals. There Heracles is
shown a great mountain with twin peaks, the one called paoihslaq
cixQa and sacred to Zevs paadevQ ; the other, axga TVQavvixr), was
called Tvy&voc, dxga ; Typhon as usual signifying illusion. On the
first was enthroned Paaiheta, who is called [jiaxaQla datjuoov, Aio<;
paaihecoi; exyovoq, and is attended by AIKY\, "Evvo/tta, 'EiQTjvr], and
NofjLoc, (who is also oqQoc, Ao'yog). On the Peak of Illusion was
enthroned TvQawk, attended by *Qju6rri<; 9 e/ Yp()i$ t 'Avo/Liia, andrdm<;.
The Cynic, then, could well be said dyandv . . . fiaadeiav nal

9. a Cf. Iliad, II. 783, ew *A(t(/ioi,<;, oOi <paai Tvyawvc, e/ujuevcu evvd<;.
ev Meydqoic, is naQanQoadoxiav for elv 'AQI/UOIC;. There is no mytho-
logical connexion of Typhon with Megara ; as in the passage already
quoted from Dio Chrysostom, the Titan is the personification of
Illusion. Perhaps the conception is based on the famous description
in Pindar (Pyth., i. 29) of the monster confined beneath Etna, from
which

/iisv dnkdrov nvQO$ dyvordrai
naydi noTa/iol d 9 dfjicQaioiv /uv JIQO%EOVTCU
QOOV Kanvov \ aiOcova. nth.

Diels (Sillog. Grace., ii. 193) quotes Aristotle (Rhet., 1412, d. 33)
rd de nagd yqa^^a nolei ov% o My&i kiyciv, dAA' o ^eraaTQS(pEi ovo^a.
The point is twofold : (a) Stilpo pursued dQerrj in verbal quibbles
(his eristic studies), (b) and another object of his pursuit was not
ager?! herself, but his mistress Nixaqerr}. The doubles entendres
which Wachsmuth discovered in evvdq dicbxew and xararQ^eiv do
not commend themselves to Diels. But xaTaTQi{3eiv was so fre-
quently used sensu obsceno that the suspicion seems justified.

10. Diels hesitates to ascribe the passage to Crates ; * vereor ', he
says, ' ne ea quae congruenter cum Axiocho, p. 336D, exponuntur, a
Cratete abhorreant. Ilium enim ncc tarn Attice gesturum fuisse, ut
Thebanum, nee tarn molliter, ut Cynicum.' The first does not seem
an important objection ; Crates passed much of his time at Athens
and must have been perfectly familiar with Athenian customs. For
the second, we shall see that with him the austerity of Diogenes was
considerably relaxed. The parallel with the Axiochus is admittedly
striking, but there is no evidence to prove that Teles is quoting that
dialogue. The date of the Axiochus is disputed. Immisch gives
35~3 as a probable date, which Taylor quotes with the remark
that * it may be too early '. Chevalier argues that it is of Neo-
Pythagorean origin and does not appear to be earlier than the first
century B.C. ; the Bude* editor, regarding the passage of the Axiochus
as being a quotation from Teles rather than vice versa and further

fiaaifatag, i. 65.

58 A HISTORY OF CYNICISM

relying on two other passages (366E : 3676) which show the influence
of Bion of Borysthenes, dates it about the end of the third century.
However this may be, it is probable that both our passage and that
of the Axiochus have a common source in Prodicus. It is expressly
stated in the Axiochus that ravra a heyo), IlQodixov rov acxpov eariv
ami%Yiiiaia . . . (pQaooiji av ooi ravra d jivijjuovevoa). The famous
story of Prodicus about the choice of Heracles, quoted in Xenophon's
Memorabilia, seems to have formed the basis of much Cynic allegory
(cf. Dio Chrys., i. 65) ; and it is very possible that Crates might
have adapted a familiar passage of Prodicus to the refutation of
Hedonist theories. This would itself account for the * non-Cynic
softness which Diels discovers.

CHAPTER III
CYNICISM IN THE THIRD CENTURY B.C.

BY the beginning of the third century B.C. Cynicism must
have been a familiar phenomenon in the Greek world. In
attempting to determine its influence during the Hellenistic
period it is important to remember that it was a phenomenon
which presented itself in three aspects. There was first the
KWMOS /3/o, the mendicant life, whose insignia were the
wallet, the TQificov and the staff. Second, there was the
Cynic slogan, naQa^dqarreiv TO vojuiajua, with all it implied
in the way of attack on established conventions and values.
Finally, there was the KVVIKCH; tQonoq in literature ; for the
writings of Monimus, Crates, and Metrocles had established
TO anovdaioyeXoiov as the genus of Cynic writings, though
one of its most familiar species, the diatribe, was a develop-
ment largely due to Bion. Since Cynicism was never a school
of philosophy in the strict sense, these diverse aspects were
not inseparable ; hence we shall find men of widely different
outlook and temperament described as ' Cynics ' ; hence, too,
tendencies inherent in earlier Cynicism were found when
developed to lead to very divergent conclusions. Doubtless
many persons took up staff and wallet and imagined that by
virtue of this alone they were the disciples of Diogenes, although
to judge from the literary evidence there were not so many
charlatans associated with Cynicism during this period as
later in the Roman Empire. Again, the Cynic naqa^d^a^K;
attracted from time to time philosophers of the dogmatic
schools who were particularly interested in stressing the gulf
that separates the Wise Man from the standard of the normal
world ; while the ridicule of accepted values was pushed to
its nihilistic conclusion by such persons as Menippus, who
became * The mocker of human life '. The literary influence
of Cynicism leads to the appearance of Cynic forms and ideas
in writers who were very far from living the xwinoq

59

60 A HISTORY OF CYNICISM

such as Leonidas of Tarentum, and, in Roman times, Lucilius
and even Horace. It will be most convenient to deal first with
the followers of the KVVIKOQ /?/og, the Cynics proper ; then
with the influence of Cynicism on the philosophic schools ;
finally (and more briefly, since it has attracted the attention
of many scholars), something must be said about the literary
influence of Cynicism.

The ' succession ' of Cynics given by Diogenes Laertius
takes us two or three generations beyond Metrocles, i.e. well
into the latter half of the third century.

The * pupils ' of Metrocles were Theombrotus and Cleomenes ;
Theombrotus had for a pupil Demetrius of Alexandria ; while
Cleomenes instructed Timarchus of Alexandria and Echecles of
Ephesus. Echecles also heard Theombrotus ; his own lectures
were attended by Menedemus. . . . Menippus of Sinope also
became famous amongst them. 1

Nothing more is known of Timarchus, Theombrotus, and
Echecles ; and of Cleomenes only that he wrote a book called
naidaycoxixos, which employed the legend of the ' Sale of
Diogenes '. Cronert 2 was the first to point out that the
passage of diatribe quoted by Stobaeus viii. 20 is almost
certainly a fragment of Demetrius of Alexandria. The frag-
ment gives independent grounds for dating the floruit of
Demetrius c. 250 B.C., for the employment of personification
shows the influence of Bion. It deals, in the manner of the
choice of Heracles, with the struggle between good and evil
instincts in the human soul : the style is lively, the sentences
short, with frequent appeals to the ' imaginary adversary '.

Now if Courage and Cowardice were to take their stand beside the
soldier in the battle-line, what contradictory advice do you suppose
they would give ? Would not Courage bid him stand fast and
guard his post ? ' But the enemy have opened fire/ * Stand fast/
* But I shall be wounded.' ' Be brave. 1 * But I shall die.'-' Die
rather than leave your post.' A stubborn council this, and bitter ;
but the advice of Cowardice is indulgent, and full of loving kindness
(<pddv6QOjno<;). He is frightened, she bids him retire forthwith.
' My shield gets in my way.' ' Throw it away, then.' ' So does
my breastplate.' ' Loosen it ' ; yes, truly a milder counsel than
the former. So is it in other things Continence says, * Take
nothing from a forbidden source. Go without food, without

1 D.L., vi. 95. 2 Kolotes und Menedemos, pp. 46-7.

CYNICISM IN THE THIRD CENTURY B.C. 61

drink but persevere, be strong. And at the last, die, rather than
live by crime.' Incontinence says : * Drink what you like, eat
what is sweetest. Your neighbour's wife is fair in your eyes ?
Take her. You lack money ? Borrow. You have borrowed, and
are still in want ? Don't pay anything back. Your credit is not
good for further borrowing ? Then steal/ Great indeed is the
difference between them on this point ; yet who knows not, that
the goodwill of Incontinence brings ruin to those who accept her,
while that of Continence is as a saviour to man ?

Cronert l is also responsible for the fact that we are able
to view Menedemus is a more sober light than that in which
he is portrayed by Diogenes Laertius.

Menedemus [according to the latter] reached such a pitch of
charlatanry as a miracle-monger that he used to go about dressed
as a Fury, saying he had come from Hades as a scout (enloxonos) of
human wrong-doing, and that he was going to report on it to the
nether-gods. He was dressed in a long grey tunic, with a crimson
girdle ; on his head an Arcadian hat (or mko<;} with the twelve signs
of the Zodiac wrought on it. . . . 2

Cronert argues that Menedemus is here confused with some
character (perhaps Menippus himself), from the Nexvia of
Menippus. It is noteworthy that parallels to this passage can
be found in two of Lucian's dialogues which are based on
Menippus. In the XaQwv ij emoxonovvres Charon is brought
up by Hermes to view the world of men ; in the Menippus,
Menippus wears the mAog, and has gained admission to the
underworld by the help of a Chaldaean astrologer ; the
twelve signs of the zodiac are of course of an astrological
significance.

This portion of the ftlos can then be dismissed as fictitious,
but there is no reason to doubt the statement that Menedemus
was first a pupil of Colotes of Lampsacus, the Epicurean ;
that later, becoming that very rare phenomenon, an apostate
from Epicureanism, he came under the influence of the Cynic
Echecles of Ephesus. Two papyri from Herculaneum confirm
this, 3 they show Menedemus in conflict with his former master
on the question of Epicurean criticism of Poetry, when a
spirited interchange of argument evidently took place. The

1 op. cit., p. I fT.
2 D.L., vi. 102. 3 Here. Pap., Nos. 208, 1082.

62 A HISTORY OF CYNICISM

controversy will be more relevant in the chapter on the relations
between Cynicism and the philosophic schools.

We find no mention in Diogenes Laertius of Sochares, the
subject of satirical epigrams of Leonidas of Tarentum, nor of
Teles ; while Bion of Borysthenes is classified as a follower
of the Academy, and a quotation from Cercidas of Megalopolis
is introduced into the Life of Diogenes without a definite
statement that he was a Cynic. The lack of exact chronological
data for the last three writers and for Menippus makes it a
matter of some doubt as to their proper places in an account of
Cynicism during the third century ; but chronology will be
approximately observed, and it will be most convenient to
treat them in the order Bion-Menippus-Cercidas-Teles.

(a) Bion.

Approximately contemporary with Metrocles, and of great
importance in the development of Cynicism, is Bion of Borys-
thenes. Diogenes Laertius, though admitting that he had
Cynic connexions, includes him amongst the followers of the
Academy ; but there is an essentially Cynic spirit in the sur-
viving fragments of his writings, and he played an important
part in the development of the diatribe, so that he may properly
be considered here.

' A strange creature,' is Tarn's opinion; * few men in the
third century are harder to judge, and probably few had more
influence/ Bion's career is of interest as showing what the
age had to offer to a man of humble birth who chose to make
his living by his wits. He was the son of a fishmonger and a
hetaira a combination from which, as von Arnim penetratingly
remarks, he may have derived that familiarity with vulgar
phraseology which distinguished his style. But perhaps there
was more than the argot of the fish-market to be learned at
Borysthenes. In the time of Dio Chrysostom the town was
remarkable for its devotion to Homer * they are all enthusi-
astic admirers of the poet : most of the citizens know the
Iliad off by heart . . . their poets refer to Homer alone in
their writings.' l So it is possible that the young Bion was

1 Dio Chrys., 36, 9. Prof. Rostovtseff tells me that recent
archaeological finds at Borysthenes (Olbia) strikingly confirm Dio,
for over a long period both papyri and inscriptions abound with
Homeric personal names.

CYNICISM IN THE THIRD CENTURY B.C. 63

not wholly uneducated when his father's fraudulency caused
the whole family to be sold into slavery. At any rate he was
handsome, and was bought by * a certain rhetorician ' for
obvious enough purposes ; a fact which Bion's enemies
pounced on, and which he hardly troubled to deny. But the
boy seems to have had brains as well as looks, and the rhetorical
training which he got (presumably) during this period was to
have an important influence on his style. When his master
died he left all his possessions to Bion. * I burned all his
speeches,' 1 Bion says ; ' scraped everything together, and came
to Athens to study philosophy. ' 2 We cannot say precisely
when this was : but it seems to have been earlier than 314, for
he is associated with Xenocrates. In keeping with the custom
of the age he went the round of the schools ; the passage of
Diogenes Laertius which gives his philosophical training has
caused much controversy. But perhaps the most likely account
is that he first studied at the Academy under Xenocrates,
then for a time lived as a Cynic, then studied with Theodorus
' the atheist ' and finally with Theophrastus. 3

At some time in his career Bion ' taught ' at Rhodes : like
the Sophists he went on lecture-tours round the Greek world :
but the only other date we can determine with anything like
certainty is for his visit to Antigonus Gonatas at Pella, which
Tarn thinks must have been later than 276. The date of
Bion's death is unknown, though one may conjecture that it
was between 260 and 250 ; tradition says that it took place at
Chalcis, and, according to Favorinus, Antigonus himself
attended his old counsellor's funeral.

1 Hicks translates cfvyyQdju^ara as ' books ', but it is probably more
technical than that * written speeches 'if used of the works of a
rhetor. Cf. Isoc. 405 c.

2 These biographical details, up to the arrival at Athens, are from
a letter which Laertius says was addressed by Bion to Antigonus
Gonatas as an answer to his traducers. Cronert doubts its genuine-
ness : but it is accepted by Hirzel, Hense, and Tarn : also by Kiesling
with the reservation ' haec si vera non sunt at ad veritatem ficta esse
concedi debet '. This is true ; the passage is marked by the (pogrMa
3v6jna.Ta which Bion is described as using (TO> dyxtivi dnojuvaadjuevos) :
the use of quotation (ravr^ roi yeveflq re xai al^aroq ev^o^iai slvai) :
the sentiments are those of Bion (axonei, d /*' eg* Iftavrov). Hense
considers that the passage of Stobaens (86. 13) on the same theme
a man's a man for a' that- derives from this letter.

a See Note i to Chap. III.

64 A HISTORY OF CYNICISM

Bion's career and temperament were such as to earn him
many enemies ; and their attacks have survived in the biography
of Diogenes Laertius. Hense l finds that the life in Diogenes
Laertius uses two sources hostile to Bion, one attacking his
morals and way of life, the other a criticism of his style. The
former is the more malignant, and since it contains charges of
homosexuality similar to those found in the Life of Arcesilaus,
he lends somewhat hesitating support to Wilamowitz 5 view
that these derive from Aristippus nsgl nahaiaq TQvyfjs.
Charges of homosexuality are of course the stock-in-trade of
Greek scabrous gossip, but there remain indictments against
Bion which do not come under this head, and which deserve
more detailed examination. They are found in Plutarch and
Stobaeus as well as Diogenes Laertius ; though the latter puts
the case most concisely in his description of Bion as aocpia-
rr/c nowihoq,* ' a most versatile sophist '. Certainly Bion
followed the practice which originally brought the Sophists
into disrepute that of giving lectures for money. Diogenes
Laertius says that he was no^vrs^ ; and Stobaeus 3 quotes
him as saying that there were three types of pupil, like Hesiod's
three races of men ; the golden learned and paid, the silver
paid but did not learn, the bronze learned but did not pay.
Of course no follower of the Cynic way of life could charge
high fees for his lectures and remain true to the ideal of Penury ;
still, the mere charging for professional services cannot have
carried the stigma that it did in the days of Socrates. A
student at the Lyceum or the Academy needed a well-lined
purse, as we have seen from the complaints of Metrocles ; the
objection to Bion was not that he demanded a fee but that he
had little to offer in return that he was, in fact, a charlatan,
both in his life and his writings. His manner of life is described
as being no^niKoc, KOI djioAavacu rv<pov dvvdjtievoc;, ' showy,
and able to derive pleasure from arrogance ' ; he was yavxaoiav
eTtire'xvcbfjievoq, ' one who devised methods of ostentation ' :
* extremely selfish ' ; above all, * one who gave many openings
to those who wished to rail against philosophy '. We know
that Persaeus and Philonides 4 tried to dissuade Antigonus
from inviting Bion to the court at Pella by stressing his lowly
origin ; possibly they also urged on the king that Bion was no

1 Tel., Rel y Ix. 2 D.L., iv. 4?- 3 Flor. t 31. 97-

4 D.L., iv. 47.

CYNICISM IN THE THIRD CENTURY B.C. 65

real philosopher, and are ultimately responsible for the charges
we have been examining.

More value may be attached to the criticisms directed against
the style of Bion, for, as Hense points out, the numerous writ-
ings of Bion would give ample material for a fair judgement ;
it is furthermore possible to suggest that these criticisms
derive from the Stoics of the second century B.C. and their
theory of the Plain Style. 1

The hostile references to Bion are embittered by the fact
that through his association with Theodorus he was charged
with being an atheist, which seems to have prejudiced Diogenes
Laertius against him. Diogenes makes this the subject of
one of his usual frigid epigrams how Bion had denied the
gods all his life, and how when he came to die at Chalcis he
wore amulets and muttered charms * as though the gods only
existed when Bion graciously chose to recognize them '. For
this pragmatic conversion he applies to Bion the particularly
opprobrious term of Ae/^efe, ' scum '. Hense points out that
there are not many examples of impious dicta related of Bion,
and what there are are of the usual Cynic type, retorts to the
priests of the mystery religions, doubts about oracles, and the
like.

* Of all the many who flocked to his lectures ', says Diogenes
Laertius, ' not one is named as his pupil.' This may well be
true ; on the formal side of philosophy Bion had nothing new
to offer. Eclectics are not the persons to start a new move-
ment, their doctrines are generally hastily patched together to
meet an emergency, and become obsolete when that emergency
has passed. No direct trace remains of Bion's lectures ; and
Laertius gives no formal list of his writings, he merely says
that * He left very many memoirs (vnojuv^^ara) and also
sayings of useful application' (anocpdey^ara %Qi,a)dr] nqayfrnreiav
neQie%ovTa) ; while from a fragment of Philodemus we gather
that one of his diatribes was called negl oqyr]<;. But it is
a small change from the spoken lecture to the written dia-
tribe which is designed for a larger audience than can be
reached by word of mouth, and quotations from Bion in
Teles are sufficiently numerous and detailed to enable us
to form a clear picture of his methods. The most obvious
point about Bion's philosophy is that it treats of ordinary

1 See Note 2 to Chap. III.
6

66 A HISTORY OF CYNICISM

human problems in a common-sense spirit, though for emphasis
employing all the devices of contemporary prose style. It
follows the spirit of the Socrates of Xenophon's Memorabilia,
or of Crates going from house to house to cure the dissensions
that arise in family life. The situations dealt with are those
that may confront any man, from the universalia of old age,
poverty, exile, slavery, the fear of death, down to the more
particular case of a nagging wife. The panacea is still avTag-
xeia-andOeta but with a difference ; for the blending of
Hedonist and Cynic doctrines adopted by Bion had evolved
an avraqxeia quite different from the aggressive asceticism of
Diogenes, one best expressed by the famous simile of the
Actor. The actor's concern is to play adequately the part
assigned to him by the playwright ; but while doing that he
preserves the integrity of his own personality. Hecuba is in
reality nothing to him, however much his performance gives
an impression to the contrary. * Just as the good actor plays
with skill the Prologue, the middle portion, and the denoue-
ment of a play, so should a good man play well the beginning,
the middle, and the end of life.' It is the attitude represented
in the Spartan verses,

ovre TO f}V Oe^evoi xahov ovre to Ovfiaxew
TO ravra xahax; CLJLKPOTEQ* enrehiaai.

Circumstances being unalterable, the key to happiness lies in
our approach to them.

Bion says, just as the bites of wild animals depend on how you
hold them (e.g. get hold of a snake round the middle and you'll be
bitten, grasp it by the neck and you'll come to no harm), so
with circumstances, one's approach to them determines the amount
of pain that will be experienced. If you treat them as did Socrates,
there will be no pain : if otherwise, you will experience pain due
not to circumstances themselves, but to your own character and
false illusions. Hence we should not try to alter circumstances,
but to adapt ourselves to them as they really are, as do sailors.
They don't try to change the winds or the sea, but take care that
they are ready to adapt themselves to conditions. In a dead calm
they use the oars, with a following breeze they crowd on sail ;
with a head wind they shorten sail or heave to. Do you adapt
yourself to circumstances in the same way. You have grown old,
do not long for youth. Again, you are weak : do not hanker after
what belongs to the strong. . . . You are penniless, do not seek

CYNICISM IN THE THIRD CENTURY B.C. 67

the ways of the wealthy. . . . Adapt yourself to conditions as sails
to the wind. . . .*

The fault is always in ourselves

... If circumstances could speak, as we do, and had the power to
state their case . . . would not Poverty say to the man reviling her,
* What is your quarrel with me ? Have I deprived you of any
good thing ? Of prudence, or justice, or courage ? Or are you
short of any of the necessities of life ? Well, are the roads not
full of herbs, and the springs of water ? Do I not offer you a bed
wherever there is soil, and bedding wherever there are leaves ?
Can you not make merry in my company ? What, have you never
heard an old woman singing to herself as she munches her barley-
cake ? ' . . . If Poverty spoke in this vein, what answer would you
have to make ? I think I should have nothing to say. But we
blame anything rather than our own bad training and disposition,
age, poverty, our adversary, the day, the hour, the place. 2

Avoidance of fjiB^i^oiQia is essential to happiness, the
recipe for which is simple. * If you can fashion a man who
despises lusts, and is not oppressed by toils, who takes glory
and obscurity alike and has no fear of death, then you have a
man who can do anything without sorrow. J 3 The first three
of these qualifications may obviously be attained by the method
of adapting oneself to circumstances ; for the last, a new set
of similes is employed. ' We regard death as the most dread
of terrors ' but in reality it is nothing of the sort. ... * The
aged should quit life as gladly as would a tenant a tumbledown
house. '

Just as we leave a house [says Bion] when the landlord, failing to
get the rent, takes away the door or the slating, or closes up the
well : so should we quit our bodies, when Nature, our landlord,
deprives us of the use of our eyes, ears, hands, and feet. ... I
do not remain behind : as a replete guest from a feast, so do I
leave life, when the hour is come for ' passengers to board ship '.

It is possible that the piling up of similes in this passage is
artificial, for after all what we have is Theodorus' epitome of
Teles' version of Bion : but we can at any rate, when con-
fronted with the famous similes of life as a Paneguris, as a
feast, and of the aged body as a ruined house, appreciate the
force of the adjective noiKihot; applied to Bion.

*6. aff. 2 4- 6ff. 3 ii. 7-

68 A HISTORY OF CYNICISM

There is nothing new about the thought of the passages
quoted : even the similes are sometimes old ones refurbished.
It is significant, too, that the apophthegms ascribed to Bion
so frequently parallel those quoted of earlier personages,
especially Diogenes. 1 It is likely enough that Bion would take
some apophthegm of Diogenes, common currency amongst the
Cynics, alter it to suit conditions, and pass the result off as his
own.

* Bion mingled together every aspect of style ' ; the diatribe
as he developed it employed all the devices of contemporary
prose. Hense 2 points out the care taken in the balance of
syllables and their rhythm, the use of asyndeton and assonance,
and of the * conversionis figurae ' ; perhaps Bion learned these
from the teacher of rhetoric who gave him his early education.
Fiske notes the use of quotation, of %Qslai, of allegorical
personification, of little scenes which appear to be influenced
by the Mime, of stock-figures, animal similes, and character-
sketches. The latter show the influence of Theophrastus, the
parallels with whom are interesting. 3

In Fiske's judgement, * Bion added nothing to the world's
thought ' ; none the less, he is of great importance to Cynicism,
and to a lesser degree to the development of Greek literature.
The question of the influence of the diatribe as perfected by
Bion on the satire of Lucilius and Horace has been fully dis-
cussed by Fiske, and is not especially relevant here. For the
Cynic movement, Bion has a double significance. We have
seen how Diogenes personified the Cynic conception of
avraqxeia, while Crates stands for that of cpihavOgamia ; a
third great ideal, that of the Koa^onoXiir](;, finds its first real
embodiment amongst the Cynics in Bion. Diogenes and
Crates, while professing the ideal of cosmopolitanism, had in
fact kept to the great centres of Greek civilization, mainly, of
course, to Athens. But Bion, like the Sophists, travelled
from city to city, and made prolonged stays at Rhodes and
Pella. The vagrant preacher, who became so important a
figure in the Roman Empire, finds his prototype in Bion, the
traditional accounts of whom remind us of the description of
Whistler * the scintillant tramp . . . exempt from human
knowledge and human decencies '. But Eratosthenes admitted

x See Note 3 to Chap. III. 2 op. cit.

3 See Note 4 to Chap. III.

CYNICISM IN THE THIRD CENTURY B.C. 69

that under his trappings Bion was sound ; and there is perhaps
some justification for Bion's own claim, that what he brought
to market was the wheat of philosophy, not the barley of
rhetoric. Only, it was the philosophy of Hellenistic times,
which we have defined as daily strength for daily needs. Bion,
too, was the first Cynic to become court-philosopher ; Tarn
thinks he may well have had much influence on Antigonus
Gonatas, or, at least, that their viewpoints had a good deal in
common. The Stoics played the role of King's counsellor
more successfully than any other school ; the Cynic, if true
to his profession, was too wedded to na,QQr]ala to be amenable
to all but the most tolerant of monarchs. Nevertheless, there
were Cynics at court under the Empire ; here as elsewhere
Bion anticipates the later Cynicism, rather than reflects the
earlier.

On the world in general, Bion's influence has not been
negligible.

Dixeris egregie, notum si callida verbum
reddiderit iunctura novum . . .

the simile of Man the actor on the stage of the world, of Life
as a Feast which one should quit * ut conviva satur ', the
advice to trim your sails to the breeze, the story of the dying
frog, * this may be fun to you, but it's death to me ' have
all passed into common usage. One is tempted to say that
Bion, in a different way from that of Diogenes, fulfilled the
command na^a^dqarreiv ro v6/u,f,o^a. Similes and metaphors
are indeed a kind of currency ; * licuit semperque licebit,
signatum praesente nova producere verbum ' ; some of the
best issues, whose values have not depreciated, bear the impress
of Bion.

(b) Memppus.

The name of Menippus is familiar, yet we have surprisingly
little detailed information about him ; like the Cheshire cat,
he has faded away to a grin. Ancient tradition is agreed that
he was a slave ; according to Diocles I he was born at Gadara,
and was in the service of a citizen of Pontus, but in some way
obtained his freedom and lived at Thebes. Here he came
under Cynic influence, most likely that of Metrocles. This

1 D.L., vi. 99.

70 A HISTORY OF CYNICISM

evidence shows that his floruit falls in the first half of the third
century ; we do not know when he died. The tradition that
he was a moneylender and speculator in marine insurance is
probably apocryphal, resting as it does on the always dubious
authority of Hermippus. This account has led Zeller and
other modern writers to speak of him as ' a degenerate Cynic ',
but Varro refers to him as ' Menippus ille, nobilis quidem
canis ', and Lucian ranks him with Antisthenes, Crates, and
Diogenes as the most notable of the Cynics.

In the writings of Menippus the Cynic spirit of mockery of
human values was all-pervading. Lucian x says that he went
about KWfjicodonoi&v xal ye^anonotdjv ; Marcus Aurelius 2
calls him ' the mocker of mankind '. * No serious treatises
were produced by him/ says Diogenes Laertius, * but his books
overflow with ridicule ' ; there is no conflict here, as both
Hicks 3 and Helm 4 suggest, with the description of him as
onovdaioyeAoiog in Strabo. 5 TO Gnovdaioyshoiov was a distinct
literary genre ; Diogenes Laertius, or rather his source Diocles,
means that all Menippus' works are thus comprised, there are
no serious ethical writings, such as were perhaps some of the
Dialogues of Diogenes, and certainly the Epistles of Crates.
The comic genius of Menippus may well have stressed the
yeholov, but to judge from the fragments of the Sale of Diogenes
and those dialogues of Lucian which use Menippus as a model,
an element of the anovdalov was not absent. Very scanty
fragments of Menippus survive, and it is a highly speculative
proceeding to try to reconstruct his works from Varro or even
from Lucian. Lucian was obviously attracted by the detached
and satiric attitude of Menippus, so like his own ; he also
found a ready vehicle for his thought in the adaptation of the
dialogue for comic and satiric purposes, which was Menippus'
chief contribution to literature. The classical theory of
Imitation demanded that in handling a particular literary genre
an author should conform to a more or less definite framework,
but it offered plenty of scope for originality in detail. It is
not therefore likely that from the dialogues of Lucian we can
reconstruct in any detail the Menippean original. 6 To take

1 Bis. Ace., 33. 3 vi. 47. 3 Diog. Laert,, vol. ii, p. 103 (Loeb).
4 Pauly-Wissowa, s.v. Menippus. 5 xvi. 759.

6 For an attempt to do this see R. Helm, Lucian und Menipp.,
Leipzig, 1906.

CYNICISM IN THE THIRD CENTURY B.C. 71

one example, the Sale of Diogenes is generally conceded to have
influenced Lucian in writing his Sale of Creeds : but in detail
they must have differed widely, for we know that the work of
Menippus held up Diogenes to admiration, while Lucian
ridicules him together with the other philosophers. The most
that can be done is to gather a general idea of the subject and
spirit of the Menippean writings from the evidence of their
titles, and from the outlines of those dialogues of Lucian which
seem to have been influenced by them. * The books of
Menippus ', says Diogenes Laertius, 1 * number thirteen/ and
he gives a partial catalogue as follows : ' Nsuvta, AiaOfjxcu,
'EmoTohal xsxo/Liyjev/jievai, and rov ra>v Oetiv nqoadmov,
rovq yvaiKoix; Hal /taOrj/mTixovt; KOI y >// /mi ixoix;,
'EmxovQov, ra<; GQnaxsva^evaQ \vn* avrcov] elxddat; xai aMa.'
How many books are thus comprised we do not know ; but
the titles of some of the works not in this list may be gathered
from other sources.

Diogenes Laertius 2 himself mentions a book called A ioyevov<;
and Athenaeus 3 speaks of a av^noaiov and an

The original of all Greek vexvtat is of course Homer's
description of the descent of Odysseus to Hades in the eleventh
Book of the Odyssey. Literature has always been ready to
grant the Duchess of Malfi's wish

Oh that 'twere possible we might

But hold some two days' converse with the dead ;

In Greek literature stories of the Underworld had enforced
the loftiest lessons of philosophy, as in the myths of Plato, or
provided material for hilarious comedy, as in the Frogs of
Aristophanes. But for no purposes are they better adapted
than those of Satire ; and Menippus is one of a long line of
satirists who have taken a tour of the Underworld to describe
how there, where a truer standard of values prevails, their
enemies are faring very badly indeed. The Homeric parodies
of Crates seem to have touched on the Nexvta, and, like the
Zikhoi of Menippus' contemporary Timon of Phlious, to have
described the wretched state of his philosophical opponents in
the life to come. The Nexvta of Menippus formed the model
for Lucian in several dialogues (such as the Menippus, or

1 vi. 101. 2 vi. 29. 8 xiv. 27, 84.

72 A HISTORY OF CYNICISM

Necyomanteia, the Charon, the KardnAov$, and the Dialogues
of the Dead), from which we may catch something of its spirit.
From the evidence of a passage of Diogenes Laertius which
Cronert clearly shows to be based on the Nenvta of Menippus,
it seems clear that the journey was made by Menippus
himself by the aid of magic arts ; and that its avowed object
was to consult Tiresias is likely both from the Homeric original
and the presumable echoes of Menippus in Horace and Lucian.
There was of course a description of our future state. Sceptre
and Crown have tumbled down ; the only people to enjoy
happiness are the poor man and the Cynic, who are free from
Illusion in this world and the next. The Cynic does not
shrink from inquiring too curiously, and we see Philip of
Macedon cobbling old shoes in a corner, and are unable to
distinguish the skull of a famous beauty from that of Thersites.
To judge from the Icaromenippus of Lucian, and the fact that
one of Varro's satires was called the Endymiones, it is possible
that the Nexvta included a tour of Heaven as well as Hell, and
that the gods received scarcely more respectful treatment than
had the dead kings and potentates.

The AiaQr\Kai (Wills or Testaments) may have been parody
of the Wills of Philosophers ; or more probably pieces of
humorous legislation like the decree proposed against the
rich by Skull the son of Skeleton of the deme Cadaver in
Lucian 's Menippus^ and the resolution to exclude undesirable
aliens from Olympus in the Gods in Council*

The Epistles composed as through from Gods were Lucian J s
model for the Letters of Cronos ; the comic possibilities are
many and obvious ; Lucian confines himself to satire on the
importunate nature of human prayer, and the conflict between
the rich and poor.

The Sale of Diogenes may be conjectured to have played
an important part in the development of the Diogenes legend.
Menippus, himself once a slave, was evidently concerned to
show that slavery was something indifferent to the Wise Man.
His ideal aoyos was, of course, Diogenes, and he must be
turned into a slave in the way most probable at that time, by
being captured and sold by pirates. 3 Fragments are preserved
in the account of Diogenes Laertius. Diogenes was put up

1 Men. y 20. 2 Deor. Con., 14.

8 Possibly in imitation of the stones about Plato.

CYNICISM IN THE THIRD CENTURY B.C. 73

for sale in the market of Crete. Asked what he could do, he
replied ' Govern men ', and told the crier to advertise that he
was available in case any one wished to purchase himself a
master. He was bought by Xeniades of Corinth, who was
soon aware of what kind of purchase he had made, and put
Diogenes in command of his estate and of the education of
his sons.

Of the contents of the Symposium we only know that in it
the exjivQcoau; of the Stoics was described as a dance. 1 Some
form of philosophical conversation was held appropriate for
the genre ; it may well have taken the form of parody in this
case. Hirzel's 2 suggestion that the encounter of Hipparchia
and Theodorus described by Diogenes Laertius 3 derives from
Menippus is interesting, but not very probable. The way in
which the incident is mentioned, * This story and countless
others are told of the female philosopher/ suggests that it
comes from a collection of %qslai. Nor do we know how far
the Symposium of Lucian, which shows the sages present
behaving or rather misbehaving like so many Lapiths, is based
on the work of Menippus.

The remaining works form an attack in the true Cynic
manner on devotees of useless knowledge. ' Away with the
learning of the clerks ! ' is the cry, natural scientists, mathe-
maticians, and philologists are employed in wasting time and
in little else. The schools of philosophy are also attacked ;
the Arcesilaus is presumably directed against the first head of
the Middle Academy, whose devotion to dialectic would earn
him the contempt of the Cynics ; while the Birth of Epicurus
and The School's Reverence for the Twentieth Day are clearly
attacks on the Epicureans. 4

The literary importance of Menippus is that he developed
for comic purposes two genres previously monopolized by
Philosophy the dialogue and the letter. True, such a
development had been foreshadowed in some of the Platonic
dialogues, notably the Euthydemus and the Menexenus ; but on
the whole Dialogue had hitherto, as he complains in the Bis

1 Athen., xiv. 27. 2 Der Dialog., p. 365, n. 3. 3 vi. 97 f.

* In the Will of Epicurus (D.L., x. 18), the school was directed
to meet on the twentieth day of the month in commemoration
of Epicurus and Metrodorus. The custom was still observed in
the time of Cicero.

74 A HISTORY OF CYNICISM

Accmatus of Lucian, ' been a dignified person, pondering on
the gods and on Nature and the Cycle of the Universe '. Now,
however, his tragic mask has been snatched away, and one
comic, satiric, and almost ridiculous thrust upon him. Worse
still, he has become a hybrid, a centaur-like creature, neither
prose nor verse, a strange phenomenon to all who hear him.
(The complaint is, of course, directed against Lucian, but the
main features of its indictment apply to Lucian's model
Menippus.) In the Menippus the Cynic appears lisping in
numbers, which had come from his association with Euripides
and Homer in the Underworld, and it is some time before he
can be called to his senses and prose. The mixture of prose
and verse is found also in Varro, in the Apocolocyntosis of
Seneca, and in Petronius, for all of which Menippus was,
even if indirectly, a model.

One can only regret the loss of the writings of Menippus,
our estimate of Greek humour would almost certainly have
been increased had they survived. The claim made by Lucian,
that he improved the Dialogue by giving good injections of
Eupolis and Aristophanes, could probably be advanced for
Menippus. For, like Aristophanes, his laughter ranged over
Earth and Heaven and Hell : only it has lost a tone or two of
geniality, it has become truly a mordant wit, that of the Cynic
who yehajv a/tia edawev. To Menippus the world was a
vast madhouse ; as Diogenes had said, most men are so nearly
lunatics that a finger's breadth would make the difference.
Equally absurd are the trappings of wealth, the pedantry of
learning, the vanity of beauty, and that most awful of all cosmic
phenomena, the exnvQcoais of the Stoics, is no more than a
mummery. This is the way the world ends, not with a bang,
but a grimace.

(c) Ccrcidas

The connexion between Antigonus Gonatas and Bion shows
the Cynic in contact with the man of affairs ; but what, if
any, political result came of their relationship we lack evidence
to decide. In Cercidas of Megalopolis, however, we have a
man of Cynic leanings who played a very prominent part in the
politics of his own city, and a not inconsiderable role on a
larger stage. Cercidas is one of those figures whose personality
has become definite in the light of the evidence of papyri.

CYNICISM IN THE THIRD CENTURY B.C. 75

Two Megalopolitan statesmen of that name were known, one
of whom lived in the fourth century, and was denounced by
Demosthenes 1 for having betrayed his country to the Mace-
donians, the other the friend of Aratus 2 who helped to bring
about the alliance between Antigonus Doson and the Achaean
League. Which of these was the aqiorof; vo^oGstt^ KOI /uefa-
d/ipa>v noirjri'jG of Stephanus of Byzantium 3 was uncertain ;
Meineke and Gerhard inclined to regard him as the older man.
That the writer of meliambic poems had Cynic leanings was
an inference from the fragment in praise of Diogenes of Sinope,
preserved by Diogenes Laertius. Then in 1906 came the
discovery of an Oxyrhynchus papyrus, containing seven frag-
ments, described as KegKida KVVO<; ^shd^oi, the meliambic
poems of Cercidas the Cynic. Hunt 4 showed that the chrono-
logical evidence indicated the latter half of the third century
as the date of their author : Powell 5 that the Cercidas of that
date was the more likely to be described as vojuoOerr]^. The
poems are, moreover, marked by obvious Cynic sentiments, iri
some cases of peculiar relevance to current political events.
All the evidence, then, points to the conclusion that the Cynic
meliambic poet was also the friend of Aratus ; we thus liave
a phenomenon unique at this period of history a <pynic
politician. \

We first hear of Cercidas in the year 225. It would her& be
irrelevant to narrate the events which brought Aratus and
Cleomenes of Sparta face to face as rivals for the headship of
the Achaean League and supremacy in the PeloponneseV
Suffice it to say that the war between Sparta and the Achaean!
League had at first found Aratus half-hearted, and the driving
force on the Achaean side had come from Sparta's old enemies,
Megalopolis and Argos. But by 225 Cleomenes* policy and
his resources were obvious, and Aratus could be indifferent
no longer. The year before Cleomenes had offered to come
to terms with the League, the condition being that he should
be made strategos for life ; had not a haemorrhage prevented
him from attending the League Council at Lerna, his terms
would probably have been accepted. As it was, Aratus
secured their rejection, but his position, the work of years of

1 De Corona, 295. 2 Polyb., ii. 65.

3 s.v. Meydkfj nohg. * Ox. Pap., viii. 26 ff.

6 Collectanea Alexandrina y p. 201.

76 A HISTORY OF CYNICISM

skilful, patient, and unscrupulous intrigue, was now really
desperate. Luck had been on his side at Lerna ; but the
troops of the Achaean League were no match for Spartans
under a Cleomenes, as was shown at Hecatombaeon ; through-
out the Peloponnese the masses were ready to rise for Cleo-
menes and revolution ; there was the threat of an alliance
between Sparta and the Aetolians. Help could only come
from one quarter ; Aratus, who had won his ascendancy by
driving the Macedonians out of the Peloponnese, must bring
them back again to retain it. The story of the negotiations
which brought Macedon into the war, and the campaigns
leading up to the decisive battle of Sellasia, are of absorbing
interest, heightened by the good fortune that we have accounts
written from opposite standpoints. The pro-Spartan history
of Phylarchus seems to have been Plutarch's chief source for
his Life ofCleomencs ; while Aratus' own memoirs are generally
conceded to have been followed in the account of Polybius.
Certainly the ingenious piece of special pleading with which
the negotiations with Antigonus are justified is not unworthy
of that politician.

Perceiving the Achaean League to be in desperate straits . . . [says
Polybius (or Aratus)], and knowing that Antigonus was a man of
energy, and of sense, and moreover of some pretensions to honour ;
but knowing full well that kings always measure their friends and
foes by the sole standard of expediency . . . Aratus determined
to come to terms with the said monarch, pointing out to him what
would be the most likely result of the political situation. . . . And
he had to act in a very overt way, on many occasions being com-
pelled to do and say things in public which were quite contrary to
his real intentions, so as to keep his designs hidden by creating
the exact opposite impression. Hence some things he has not
written about even in his Memoirs. 1

What masterpieces of dissimulation are thus withheld we can
but speculate : but what is revealed is disingenuous enough.

The Macedonian had to be approached : but how to do it ?
The obvious answer was through Megalopolis, ever since her
foundation anti-Laconian, and as a corollary the ally of whatever
Northern power wished to curb the influence of Sparta in the
Peloponnese. The Megalopolitans had borne the brunt of

1 Polyb., ii. 48 ff.

CYNICISM IN THE THIRD CENTURY B.C. 77

the war against Cleomenes, so an appeal would come well
from them, and Aratus had family friends there, Cercidas and
Nicophanes, who would be well qualified to make it. So, on
the suggestion of Aratus, Cercidas and Nicophanes proposed
to the Megalopolitans that envoys should be appointed to seek
the alliance of Antigonus, if they could first get the permission
of the League. (No doubt it was a principle of the Achaean
League that any alteration of foreign policy by one of its
members must be with the consent of the League Council, but
clearly this move suited Aratus well. He could sound the
opinions of the Council on a Macedonian alliance, and if they
were unfavourable, the odium would rest on Megalopolis.)
The embassy was approved by the Megalopolitans, and in due
course by the League Council, and Cercidas and Nicophanes
went to the court of Antigonus. To him ' they said very little
about the affairs of their own city, but spoke as Aratus instructed
them ', that is, they urged on the King the advantages of an
alliance between Macedon and the Achaean League at that
particular moment. * Aratus would see that good terms were
offered : he would also tell the King just when his help was
required/ Antigonus recognized that Aratus' summary of
the political situation was true, and perhaps he, too, rejoiced
at the prospect of alliance with one whose sole standard was
expediency. At all events, he gave the envoys to understand
that help from him could be looked for when needed. Nicoph-
anes seems to have played the leading part in this embassy.
Cercidas may have been chosen because he stood well at the
Macedonian Court through his kinship with the pro-Mace-
donian Cercidas of the time of Demosthenes. The envoys
then returned to Megalopolis, and in the spring of 224 reported
their mission to the League. Megalopolis, they said, had
obtained the goodwill of Antigonus, whose aid they could now
count on. Thereupon Aratus, who had private information
from Nicophanes of the King's attitude, rose to his feet. He
was delighted to hear of the King's sympathy, but would it
not be more honourable if they could win the war by them-
selves ? Macedon should only be brought in as a last resort.
It was a masterly stroke : secure in the knowledge that Anti-
gonus would come in when he gave the word, Aratus had
covered his tracks from every one but the King and his friends,
the envoys of Megalopolis ; the latter, if they had any sense

78 A HISTORY OF CYNICISM

of humour, must have found the Council of 224 very satisfying.
But, as Aratus doubtless expected, the League soon proved
quite incapable of resisting Cleomenes by itself ; the duress
of events forced Aratus to sacrifice his quixotic sense of honour
for his country's good. Antigonus was called in. But the
troubles of Megalopolis were not over ; in 223 Cleomenes
captured the city, though most of the citizens succeeded in
escaping to Messene. What then happened is not quite
clear, apparently Cleomenes offered to spare the city if the
inhabitants would return as his allies. The terms were
rejected, it is said at the instance of the young Philopoemen,
and Cleomenes razed the city to the ground. Cercidas would
seem to have been amongst those who escaped to Messene,
for we next hear of him as commanding the thousand Megalo-
politans, exiles who fought on the Achaean side at Sellasia.
But the honours of that day were not to be with the higher
officers among the Megalopolitans, but with Philopoemen,
who saw the psychological moment to attack, and seized it in
the face of their orders. Sellasia was decisive, Cleomenes fled
into exile ; Aratus returned to the headship of the Archaean
League ; and the inhabitants of Megalopolis to their ruined
city. Over the refounding and rebuilding of the city there
was much dispute and bitterness, and a reform party proposed
to reduce the city to a size which could more easily be defended,
and to provide for additional citizens by dividing up a third
of the land of existing landowners. They met with strenuous
opposition, and Antigonus appointed Prytanis, an eminent
member of the Peripatetic school, as vo^oOdr^t;. 1 The code
he proposed caused violent controversy, and the dispute was
not settled till 217, through the mediation of Aratus. It
seems highly probable that this was the occasion on which
Cercidas distinguished himself as vo/noOerr]^. 2

There had been nothing of the Cynic cosmopolitanism about
Cercidas' conduct in standing so resolutely by his country in
her misfortunes, and in being so concerned about the right
ordering of her own political affairs. Not for him the indiffer-
ence of Crates, asked by Alexander if he favoured the restora-
tion of Thebes after her fall, ' Why should it be restored ?
Perhaps another Alexander would destroy it again/ 3 Cercidas

1 Pol. t v. 93. 2 See Note 5 to Chap. III.

3 D.L., vi. 93.

CYNICISM IN THE THIRD CENTURY B.C. 79

had been a citizen of Megalopolis, not the fellow-citizen of
Diogenes in the HOOTCH;. But in one very remarkable frag-
ment 1 we see how his Cynic leanings influenced his political
views.

(Why does not God) choose out Xenon, that greedy cormorant of
the well-lined purse, the child of licentiousness, and make him the
child of poverty, giving to us who deserve it the silver that now
runs to waste ? What could prevent it (ask God that question,
since it is easy for him to bring about whatever his mind resolves)
that the man who ruins wealth by pouring out what he has or the
filthy-dross-stained usurer, should be drained of their swine-
befouled wealth, and the money now wasted given to him that has
but his daily bread, and dips his cup at the common bowl ? Has
Justice then the sight of a mole, does Phaethon squint with a single
pupil, is the vision dimmed of Themis the bright ? How can one
hold them for gods that lack eyes to see and ears to hear ? Yet
men say that the dread king, lord of the lightning, sits in mid-
olympus holding the scales of justice, and never nods. So says
Homer in the Iliad. ' He doth incline the scale to the mighty of
valour, when the day of fate is at hand/ Why then does the
impartial balancer never incline to me ? * But the Brygians, 2 dregs
of humanity (yet I dread to say it), see how far they swing down in
their favour the scales of Zeus ! What lords, then, what sons of
Ouranos shall a man find, that he may have justice ? For Zeus,
father of us all, verily is a father to some, to others but a step-
father. Best leave the problem to astrologers ; I think for them
it will be a light task to solve. But for us, let us have a care for
Paean, and for Sharing she is indeed a goddess and Retribution
that walketh the earth. While the godhead blows a favourable
wind astern, hold her in honour ; but though mortals fare well,
yet shall a sudden wind blow vaunted wealth and proud fortune
away. Who then shall vomit them back to you from the deep ? '

Can we date this remarkable outburst against social in-
equality ? Tarn thinks it emanates from the period when the
reforms of Cleomenes were arousing the oppressed classes
throughout the Peloponnese. Cercidas, he says, ' is actually
found preaching philanthropy and exhorting his fellows ' (i.e.
the governing classes) * to heal the sick and give to the poor
while they had time, otherwise the social revolution might be

1 Fr. 4 (Powell).

2 Reading, with Knox, ru d 9 ea^ara Egvyta Mva&v. Powell reads

MvaaJv.

8o A HISTORY OF CYNICISM

upon them and their wealth taken away \ l But this seems to
miss the bitterness of the passage : Cercidas does not speak
of himself as one of the governing classes, but rather as one
oppressed by the unequal distribution of wealth. * Why not
give to us the wealth that flows on useless expense ? ' and
again, * Why does the impartial balancer never incline the
scales to me ? '

We know from Polybios that social distress was particularly
rife in Megalopolis about the time of the refounding of the
city after its destruction by Cleomenes, and I suggest that it
is to these years that we must assign the poem. Polybius says
that there was a party which proposed to force men of property
to contribute a third of their land to make up the numbers of
new citizens required ; and it is significant that the poem twice
refers to the division of superfluous wealth for redistribution
amongst the poor. The bitterness of the reference to Xeno
harmonizes well with the ' disputes, jealousies, and mutual
hatreds ' which Polybius says were rife amongst the Megalo-
politans. If we accept Knox's attractive suggestion that ra
6* samara {tQvyia Mvaa>v are the Macedonians, the nature of the
allusion (a^op^ai ds Ofy fayeiv) is understandable. Cercidas,
who had played a leading part in securing the Macedonian
alliance, could hardly complain if its results were unsatisfac-
tory. That Antigonus would do little for the reforming party
is likely enough, as Tarn says, Macedonia was always the
bulwark of law and order and the existing state of affairs.
The Peripatetics, too, were always more or less dependent on
Macedonian protection, and it is likely that the code of Pry-
tanis, which caused so much dispute, unduly favoured the
wealthy. On this interpretation, the poem is not a warning
to the governing classes to mend their ways while there is time,
but a call to the party of reform not to wait for the vengeance
of Heaven to strike the rich, but to act themselves under the
inspiration of a new triad of deities, Paean and Sharing, and
Nemesis. The tone in which the false deities of popular belief
are assailed is essentially Cynic, as is the attack on luxury.
The three deities are especially interesting. As Hunt well
observes, the Cynics had a particular reverence for doctors,
they themselves were targoi of men's souls, so the reference
to Paean is readily intelligible, it implies healing both physically
1 Cambridge Ancient History, Vol. vii, p. 755.

CYNICISM IN THE THIRD CENTURY B.C. 81

and spiritually. What of Sharing (Msrddwg) ? Cercidas was
an enthusiast on the old poets, and doubtless knew the line of
Hesiod, ' Giving (Ad)$) is a good wench, but Thieving a bad
one, the bringer of Death '. Merddax; would be a very suitable
deity for a party whose programme included land-distribution,
and one can understand the commendation deoq yaq avra.
NB^OK; Kara ydv is thus not named as a threat to the wealthy
that Cleomenes and the Spartans will be upon them, but per-
haps a reminder to the party of reform that they have to fulfil
on earth the functions assigned to Zeus in heaven. As for the
wealthy, at present the winds blow fair, but let them beware
a sudden squall.

The other fragments of Cercidas can be more briefly dealt
with. Powell fragment 5 amplifies the saying of Euripides
that Love has two breezes (diaaa nvsvfiara nvl<; "Egax;) to
enforce the Cynic maxim that the sexual instincts should be
gratified with as little trouble as possible. One should avoid
the grande affaire \ ' against whomsoever Aphrodite's son
loosens his left jaw, rousing the whirlwinds and hurricanes of
passion, their voyage is ever beset with unending turmoils of
waves '. The wise man will not embark on such a stormy
voyage when a calmer passage may be had. ' Take Aphrodite
that walks the market-place, she brings not repentance. She's
there whenever you like, whenever you want her, nothing to
fear or fret over. For an obol you may lie with her, and think
yourself son-in-law to Tyndarus.' Fiske x deals very fully
with the conception of ' Venus parabilis ' in the literature of
Epicureans, and with the obvious imitations of this passage of
Cercidas in Lucilius, and more especially in Horace, satire II.
He suggests with some probability that Cercidas' simile of the
stormy and the calm voyages of love is influenced by Epicurus'
contrast of the tempest of the soul (%eip,<bv rrj<; yv%fj$), and the
calm of the soul (yahrjvrj).

Another fragment, 2 much mutilated, appears to be an attack
on music as an enervating influence. Apollo is the god of
' races who dwell in the shade, of mortals benumbed by
pleasure, avoiding toil '. The offsprings of ' the lofty-tragic-
goddess (Music) ' are ' the Phrygian eunuch with puffed cheeks
and the Lydian harlot '. Cynic parallels are readily found.
Diogenes 3 would * marvel that musicians should tune the
1 Lucilius and Horace, p. 250 ff. 2 Powell, fr. 6. 8 D.L., vi. 27.
7

82 A HISTORY OF CYNICISM

strings of the lyre, while leaving discordant the disposition of
their souls ', and Bion * in general made sport of music and
geometry ' we have as a sample his attack on Archytas * born
of the strings, happy in his conceit, skilled beyond all men to
awake the bass note of discord '.*

Powell fragments 8 and 9 are joined by Knox ; the general
sense is clear enough, the Stoics of Cercidas' time are attacked
as having degenerated from the standard of Zeno. The text
is in very bad condition, particularly fragment 9, so that there
are many doubtful readings. 2 Knox's restoration of fragment
9, lines 1-7, suggests an attack on the preoccupation of the
Stoics with dialectic, and their neglect of discipline. * Petti-
fogging lawyers they, babbling pitiful nonsense, and whetting
well their pointed tongues, no habit of discipline blunteth, nor
fatigue, its bitter edge.' Fragment 8 explicitly alludes to
' Sphaerus ' as one of these degenerates ; this is almost cer-
tainly Sphaerus of Bosporus, the philosophic adviser of Cleo-
menes of Sparta. In the list of his writings given by Diogenes
Laertius are works on Similars, on Definitions, on Contra-
dictory Statements, on Predicates, on Ambiguous terms, and
a Handbook of Dialectic in two volumes, besides treatises on
* physical ' subjects, such as the sense-organs, and minimal
parts (neql ^a^iarcor). All such occupations would come
within the sphere of rvqpot; to the Cynic. Throughout the
two fragments is evidence that the erotic practices of Sphaerus
and his associates are unfavourably contrasted with the ' SQGX;
Zavconxos 9 ' the love of a Zeno '.

Fragment 2 quotes an animal proverb. ' Remember what
the wrinkled tortoise said, " Truly home is dearest and best ".'
Whether these lines can be linked on to fragment 5, as Knox
suggests, is highly doubtful. The tortoise * happy in its thick
shell ' might well typify the Cynic anaQsia ; Gerhard quotes
Plutarch for the tortoise as a symbol of olxovqia and aichnr],
and suggests that its affection for its home typifies Diogenes'
attachment to his tub ! But perhaps we are here dealing not
with that sagacious animal, but with the other tortoise who
rashly desired to quit his lowly station and see the wonders
of the upper air, and who came to a bad end. 3 The animal

1 D.L., iv. 52. 2 See Note 6 to Chap. III.

3 Cf. Aesop's Fables : The eagle and the tortoise : quoted by
Powell.

CYNICISM IN THE THIRD CENTURY B.C. 83

is thus warning us from the wisdom of experience, against the
folly of fjiefji^i^oiQia.

Fragment i is the encomium of Diogenes quoted in Dio-
genes Laertius, hailing him as t rightly named the offspring
of Zeus, and the Heavenly Dog '. Fragment 3 apparently
assails those addicted to rgvyi}. ' How can they see wisdom
standing close at hand . . . men whose heart with mud
is filled, and with lees whose stain may not be washed
away ? '

Cercidas was the inventor of the meliambic measure ; from
a statement in Athenaeus it appears that he wrote iambics
also. Knox * maintains with great force that the iambic verses
contained in two second-century papyri, Londinensis 155, and
Heidelberg Pap. 310, form part of a moral anthology compiled
by Cercidas. The Cynic sympathies of the author at least of
the Heidelberg fragment are unmistakable, and it is likely
enough that some such anthology, which would fulfil the same
use as a collection of XQslai, would be compiled by a Cynic.
The ideas underlying these fragments, and the parallels
throughout Greek literature, are fully discussed by Gerhard ; 2
their spirit is akin to that of the diatribes of Teles, together
with which they will be briefly considered.

There is no evidence to decide how long Cercidas lived after
the vojuoOeaia of 217 ; Powell fragment 7 is his address to
his soul when on the threshold of old age. It is the declara-
tion of a man who had enjoyed his life, and certainly Cercidas
had had a full one. He had been in contact with great political
figures of the day, had negotiated with Antigonus Doson, and
seen from the inside the subtle workings of the policy of
Aratus, he had been present on that July day at Sellasia when
Sparta fought one of her greatest battles and suffered, in effect,
her final defeat. Of all this there is no direct mention ; his
thoughts are on the delights of literature, and of the frugal life.

Oft will a man unwillingly close his eyes in surrender, though not
beaten ; but thou didst have an unshakeable heart 3 within thy
breast, and one unconquered by all the cares that attend flesh-

1 The First Greek Anthologist, Cambridge, 1922.

2 Phoenix von Kolophon, Leipzig, 1909.

8 Of the perseverance shown by the Megalopolitan exiles after the
sack of the city ?

84 A HISTORY OF CYNICISM

wasting luxury. No good thing ever escaped thee, ever within thy
affections were all the cublings of the Muses. Thou hast been a
hunter, my soul, of all the Pierian maids, and a most keen tracker.
But now are a few white hairs round the fringes of thy cheeks. . . .*

4 Thou wast a hunter, my soul, of the Pierian maids ' . . .
whether it refers to his own works, to his enthusiasm for litera-
ture in general, or more narrowly to his industry as an anthol-
ogist, it is an odd reversal of the epitaph of Aeschylus, who
says nothing of his glory as a tragedian, but only that he fought
at Marathon. Yet here is no reference to Sellasia. Cercidas'
devotion to literature passed into tradition. c He ordered
Books I and II of the Iliad to be buried with him/ we are
told ; 2 and Aelian 3 describes how

A man from Megalopolis in Arcadia, Cercidas by name, being about
to die, told his sorrowing kinsmen that he gladly departed this life,
for, he said, he had hopes of meeting Pythagoras amongst the
philosophers, of the historians Hecataeus, of musicians, Olympus,
and of poets Homer. So saying, he gave up the ghost.

In the Apology, Socrates declared himself ready to meet a
hundred deaths, if he might meet Orpheus and Musaeus,
Hesiod and Homer.

The name of Cercidas was gratefully remembered by his
fellow-citizens ; and in Stephanus of Byzantium the notice
under Megalopolis reads, ' that is where Cercidas came from,
that excellent lawgiver and meliambic poet '. Gregory Nazian-
zen refers to him as 6 (piXrarot;^ and his verses were echoed by
Lucilius and Horace. In the years after 240 Megalopolis
produced a succession of noteworthy men, the far-seeing tyrant
Lydiades, Philopoemen, * the last of the Greeks ', and the
historian Polybius. To their company one must admit Cer-
cidas, * a^LaroQ ro//oOer^g nai

(d) Teles

It is a curious turn of literary fortune that Teles, apparently
a fourth-rate writer of little originality, known in no reference

1 Knox takes the passage to refer to the compilation of the anthol-
ogy, the * cublings of the Muses ' were the improving passages ;
Cercidas congratulates himself on his diligence, he never missed a
reference (TO> nv di(pevye xah&v ovdev noxa).

2 Apud. Phot., 190 (151 Bekk). * Hist., xiii. 20.

CYNICISM IN THE THIRD CENTURY B.C. 85

of earlier date than Stobaeus, should be represented by larger
fragments than Crates, Bion, and Menippus, whose works
were admired and frequently alluded to in classical times.
Teles comes down to us in extracts made by Stobaeus from
an inito^ made by an otherwise unknown Theodorus x
there may have been other middlemen involved in the process.
The fragments are edited and the date and sources of Teles
discussed in Hense, Teletis reliquiae ; he has also occupied
the attention of Wilamowitz 2 and Cronert. 3 As a result of
these studies it is known that Teles was a Megarian school-
master who flourished in the second half of the third century ;
the one reference which can be definitely dated shows that the
diatribe TIEQI qwyfjc; was composed later than 240, 4 and delivered
to an audience of youths at Megara ; Teles has a Megarian
name, his writings employ certain Doric forms, and he alludes
to himself as naidaywydi;. 5 The seven fragments are dia-
tribes ; four on such familiar Cynic themes as Exile, Self-
Sufficiency, Poverty and Wealth ; that entitled neql neqia-
Taaeo)v is a warning against ^B^^toiQia ; while two have a
polemical purpose, being respectively directed against the
Hedonist doctrine that Pleasure is the End, and the popular
view that outward appearance is the true criterion of justice
(neql rov doxelv KOI rov elvat).

A literary judgement of Teles must be based on the evidence
we possess, and can only be unfavourable. It is of course
always possible that this evidence does him much less than
justice ; it is uncertain whether his diatribes were published
as delivered or from the notes of an auditor, and in all ages
it is the fate of lecturers to be remembered for their jokes
rather than for their matter. But in six of the seven frag-
ments, if we take away borrowed passages and anecdotes, Teles
himself is represented by little more than a few connecting
sentences. This may be due to the successive " cuttings " of
Theodorus, Stobaeus, and whatever other epitomators took a
hand in it ; but it implies at least that Teles' own work was
less interesting than what he quoted. A further difficulty is

1 Conjectured to have been a Cynic of the time of the revival of
Cynicism in the first century A.D. But definite evidence is lacking.

2 Antigonus von Karystus, Exkurs. Der kynischer prediger Teles.
8 Kolotes und Menedemos, pp. 37-47.

4 16. 3. 5 16. 13.

86 A HISTORY OF CYNICISM

that Theodorus (presumably) maintains an annoying running
commentary to ensure that his reader is missing nothing
* You see the joke ? ' he asks anxiously, and again, on the
bravery of Spartan women, * What woman of our day would
have acted thus ? ' These comments are not always easy to
distinguish from what may have been Teles' remarks to his
class, e.g. * Would any of us have gone to sleep in such circum-
stances ? ' (of Socrates' fortitude in prison). But in the first
diatribe there is less extraneous matter than in the others and
some judgement can be formed of Teles' style.

A. They say it is better to seem just than to be just. Well, is
it better to seem good than to be good ? B. Hardly. A. Again,
are actors esteemed for seeming to be good, or for being good ?
B. For being good. A. And do men become accounted good
harpists by seeming to be good harpists, or for being good ? B. For
being good. A. And in general, do men become successful in all
things rather by seeming to be good, or by being good ? B. By
being good. A. By the presence of that quality success is assured,
rather than by its absence ; so that it does seem a better thing to
be good than to seem good, and the just man is good, not he who
appears to be just. . . .

And so on. However edifying this may have been to the youth
of Megara, it is deficient in both literary and logical virtues.
But, like many bad authors, Teles is of interest in reflecting
the literary tastes of his audience. His great heroes are
Socrates, Diogenes, and Crates ; and Cynic literature is freely
quoted, especially Bion. There are references to ol aQ%aloi y
presumably the older Cynic authors, and explicit quotations
from Crates and Metrocles, though it cannot be decided
whether he got them at first hand, or, as Hense maintains,
through Bion, or through books of ^qelai.^ Socrates he knows
at best through the Xenophontic tradition ; the allusion to
the PJiaedo 2 can hardly be at first hand, for it is coupled with
a magnificent howler about the last words of Socrates which
argues a very dubious source. Stilpo is naturally drawn upon
as an eminent Megarian philosopher. Of quotations from the
poets the great majority are from Homer, in all ages the school-

1 35- 4- There is one definite allusion to the

of Zeno.
ii. 15 ; 12. i.

CYNICISM IN THE THIRD CENTURY B.C. 87

book of Hellas. The only gnomic poet quoted is Theognis.
Of the tragedians Euripides is quoted six times, Sophocles
once, Aeschylus not at all ; there are several quotations from
unknown authors. The Old Comedy is not quoted, and the
New Comedy represented by Philemon and not Menander.
Finally there are references to mythological characters such as
Heracles, Cadmus, Tantalus, Oedipus, and Perseus, to familiar
historical personages, Aristeides, Lysander, Callias, and to
contemporaries, Ptolemy, Antigonus, Chremonides. Several
admiring references to Sparta imply that her valorous conduct
on such occasions as her resistance to Pyrrhus maintained
during the third century the Spartan reputation for avdpsia.
The taste catered for is clearly a popular one whose chief
interest lay in the didactic aspect of literature.

Whatever our disparagement of Teles as a writer, we can
but be grateful that these fragments have been preserved ;
without them we should know little of third-century diatribe
or of Bion.

(e) Educational Theory

The Cynics had always laid great stress on naidda though
Teles is the only known case of a Cynic schoolmaster. During
the third century Cynic works on education appeared in which
Diogenes was depicted as the ideal naidayayyoq ; two such
books known to us were the TlaiQaywyiKoc, of Cleomenes x
and the Aioyevovi; n^aou; of Eubulus. 2 The fragment pre-
served from the latter is of especial interest, for it outlines a
curriculum supposed to have been adopted by Diogenes in
educating the sons of his master Xeniades of Corinth. * After
their other studies he taught them to ride, to shoot with the
bow, to sling stones and hurl javelins. He also took them out
hunting/ . . . Such exercises were presumably recommended
as involving jioVog, and it is interesting to be told that * in
the wrestling-school he would not permit the master to give
them full athletic training, but only sufficient to keep them
in colour and in good condition '. The Cynics deprecated
specialization in athletics and several apophthegms directed
against athletes were attributed to Diogenes. 3 ' He would

1 D.L., vi. 75.

2 id., ib. 30, presumably Eubulus was himself a Cynic,
8 id., ib. 27, 33, 49, 68, &c.

88 A HISTORY OF CYNICISM

wonder that men would strive to out- do each other in digging
and kicking, and yet no one strove to become a good man * :
1 Athletes are so stupid because they are built up of pigs'-flesh
and bulls '-flesh ' ; a victory at the Great Games was won over
slaves, the Cynic's victory over men. The point was, of
course, that the athlete's abounding energy might be better
directed. The boys' intellectual development was to be
secured by * making them learn by heart many passages from
the poets, historians, and the works of Diogenes himself ; and
he would try every short cut to improve their memories '.
We see from the quotations and historical allusions in Teles
that the poets and historians were esteemed for their didactic
value, they provided koyoi xprjarot. As for behaviour, * he
taught them to wait on themselves, to eat plain food, and to
drink water. They were made to crop their hair, and wear
it unadorned, and to go about lightly clad and barefoot ; in
the streets they were to be silent and not to stare about them.'
The educational programme thus fostered on Diogenes is a
compound of various existing systems, interpreted in a Cynic
spirit. The ordinary Greek elementary education (ra yQajn-
fiara) forms its backbone, augmented by features derived from
Sparta (hunting) and from the Persian system described by
Xenophon in the Cyropaedia (shooting with the bow, riding).
The regimen is that of the Cynic avrdgxeia, but the aim of
the system is not to produce little Cynics, as naidaycoyos in the
literal, largos in a figurative sense, the Cynic labours not on
behalf of his movement but of mankind.

The papyri 1 dealing with the theme of ala%()oxe()Seia are
on the same literary level as the diatribes of Teles. They are
obviously part of an anthology ; Knox's theory that the
compilation is due to Cercidas is attractive and probable.
Addressed to a certain Parnos, who ' lends a ready ear to
ennobling verse ', 2 they are an expression of disgust at an age
of shameless commercialism whose keynote is the line of
Sophocles,

Faith withers, and Faithlessness comes to flower.

1 Londinensis 155 ; Pap. Bod. MS., Gr. F. i, Heidelberg Pap.
210. I follow Knox in regarding them as connected.

2 On Knox's reading.

CYNICISM IN THE THIRD CENTURY B.C. 89

The author announces his own intention of abiding by ' That
old rule of simplicity, to be no slave of luxury, nor of the
stomach's pleasures '. Though Business Ethics have driven
Faith and Justice from the earth, and Zeus and the gods of
popular belief are apparently impotent, the righteous man can
live in the knowledge that a day will come ... * for I see
many who grow rich on shamelessness, yet their wealth all
vanished as though it had never been '. There follows a
remarkable outburst.

ecfTiv yd@ eoTfv, og tads
o$ ev #(>oVa> to Oelov ov
vefiei d' xdcfT) rrjv xaraictiov

The deity in question is, one may conjecture, Nemesis ;
Theophrastus, asked what powers govern human life, answered
Evegysoia xai Ti/mcoQia, divinities also recognized by Democ-
ritus. 1 To enforce the warning against aia%QoxE$deia an
iambic poem of Phoenix of Colophon is cited ; it deals with
profiteers where * houses are fair and noble and worth a fortune,
but they themselves would be no bargain at three obols a
head '. Gerhard's very full discussion of these fragments
shows how the ' commonplaces ' and similes they contain are
those regarded as especially appropriate to the theme of
ala%QoxsQdeia ; and Fiske points out the parallels in Horace,
Satires, i. i.

NOTES TO CHAPTER III

i . The data are as follows . Diogenes Laertius includes Bion amongst
the adherents of the Academy, after Arcesilaus (e%ojLievco$ 'AQxeaMq)) .
He speaks of him as one of the pupils of Crates the Academic (iv.
23) ; then in the biography of Bion comes the following passage :
ofaoc, TTJV CLQ^TIV {Jiiv TtQotJQ^ro^ rd 'Axadri^aiKd, xaO J ov %QOVOV ijxove
Kgdrr^roQ' eh 9 STtaveiheto trjv XVVIM'JV dycDyrjv, hdflcav TQipaJva KGLL JHJQCLV.
Hal ri ydg a'/Uo nereaxevaaev avrov nqcx; djiaOslav ; Ineira em rd Seodchqeia
fierrjWe dianovaai; Qeodcbgov rov dQeov xard ndv elSo<; hoyov acxpicfTevov-
rog' fied' oft QeocpQactrov dir^ovas rov neQinairftwov. This certainly
seems to imply a sequence, but as it stands it involves some confus-
ion, for, as Zeller points out, Crates was not head of the Academy
till c. 276 B.C. He thinks Crates the Academic is confused with
Xenocrates or with Crates the Cynic, and von Arnim in Pauly-

1 See Powell, op. cit., p. 206.

2 noQflrefto Hunt followed by Hicks.

90 A HISTORY OF CYNICISM

Wissowa agrees. 1 Gomperz on the other hand refuses to attach any
significance to the Laertian chronology, further remarking that there
is no reason why Bion should not have heard the Academic Crates
before he was scholarch. In this he is followed by Hense, who gives
a quotation (from the Acad. Phil. Ind. Herc. y xvi. 62, 30) which makes
Bion one of the pupils of this Crates.

But the order Cynic Theodorus (whom Zeller believes to have
visited Athens in 306) Theophrastus involves no chronological
difficulty ; furthermore, a passage of Laertius 2 definitely associates
him with Xenocrates, who died in 314. Again, the reading naQflreiro
deserves more attention than it has received from Gomperz and
Hense. Hicks 3 adopts it and translates * Bion at the outset used
to deprecate the Academic doctrines, even when a pupil of Crates '.
If we accept Zeller's view that Crates the Academic has been con-
fused with Xenocrates, this difficulty is resolved. D.L., iv. 10 shows
Bion * mocking ' at Xenocrates. * Xenocrates, when mocked by
Bion, refused to reply, saying that tragedy does not deign to answer
the banter of comedy.' The anecdote which follows is perhaps not
without significance. To an unnamed person who wished to attend
his lectures, Xenocrates said, * Go away, you give philosophy nothing
to catch hold of.' Bion joined in the Cynic deprecation of astronomy
and grammar and similar * useless ' pursuits ; 4 it is perhaps not
wholly fanciful to suggest that he may have been the ill-prepared
student in question. Of course, Bion may have heard Crates lecture
before he became scholarch. Crates was on the most intimate terms
with Polemon, head of the Academy from 314 to 276 ; Bion was
probably in Athens for the greater part of this time. But in any
case the doctrines of the Academy seem to have had little or no effect
on Bion's thought.

2. The relevant passage of Diogenes Laertius runs as follows fy 'de
xal QearQixoq xai nokvg ev rw yehoiwt; diwpOQfjacu, (poQtixolq dvo^aai Kara
rcbv ftQayjudrajv %Qd){j,evo<;. dia <5r) ofiv TO navri eidei, koyov nexQacrOai (pacrt
Myeiv in avrov TOV 'JEgaToffOevrjv, w$ nq&Toc; Blcov (pikoacxptav dvOivd

This passage has engaged the attention of Wachsmuth, 5 Hense,
and Fiske, and their interpretations leave its meaning fairly clear.
The chief point of difference between them is the exact value to be
attached to Qearqixog, : Wachsmuth thinks it refers to the little mime-
like scenes, the nQoaaononoia, which Bion frequently employed ;
Hense more broadly refers it to the whole stylistic method of Bion,
which was more adapted to the stage than to the works of philosophy,
' theatricus enim mini audit philosophus qui philosophatur ng>6<;
d%Aov xal OedTQov qui in speciem laborat risum captans . . . magno-
que intervallo separatur ab illo cui alter philosophus satis magnum
theatrum est.' 6 Fiske follows this interpretation, further adducing

1 s.v. Bion. * iv. 10. 8 Loeb edition. D.L., i. 429.

4 Stob., 2. i. 30 ; 3. 4. 32. D.L., iv. 53.

5 Sill. Graec., p. 76. 6 Tel. ReL, Ivn-lix.

CYNICISM IN THE THIRD CENTURY B.C. 91

the sensationalism of Dion's methods, as exemplified by the story
of the sailors at Rhodes. 1 The phrase xai noXvq . . . xQcopevoe he
' refers to the diction of Bion, which was absolutely realistic.* Finally
the mixing of ' every style of diction * clad the works of Bion in
flowery garments (dvOwti) unbecoming the ae/worr)/; of philosophy.
These criticisms suggest the standard of the Plain Style formulated
by the Stoics Diogenes of Babylon and Panaetius, which, as Fiske a
shows, go back to the Peripatetic doctrines of TO TIQJZOV, a probability
increased by the fact that the criticism about the dvOivd seems to
have been made in the first place by Theophrastus.

The five merits of style, according to Diogenes, were pure Greek
^EXXr]via^6<;\ conciseness (avvropla), clearness (aa(pr]vela), appro-
priateness (TO ngenov), and distinction (xaTaaxevrj). 3 Panaetius
developed this theory, in particular enlarging the concept of TO
ngenov ' from the field of aesthetics to the field of ethics *. 4 From
Cicero we gather that Panaetius repudiated the Cynic JiaQqrjaia as
an offence against decency. ' Cynicorum vera ratio tota est eicienda :
est enim inimica verecundiae, sine qua nihil recte esse potest, nihil
iucundum.' 5 The (poQrwa ovo^ara of Bion were doubtless included
with the * obscena verba ' of Diogenes in this condemnation. The
phrase KOI noKvc, . . . ^oco/^evog, taken as a whole, suggests a charge
of /?co/JoAo;ta, scurrilous jesting, which Cicero, again following
Panaetius, describes as * illiberale, petulans, flagitiosum, obscenum.' 6
The * theatrical ' nature of Bion's style was inappropriate for philos-
ophy, and hence offended against rd nqercov ; the <p6QTMa ovd/Liara,
violated the canon of 'EMrjnajuos, which does not employ * the
language of the streets ' (^ elxatq. avvriQel(i) y and of xaraaxevrj,
which is Ae'ffcg exnecpevyvla rov idiconajLiov. The inference is there-
fore that these criticisms of Bion's style come from a period when
the adherents of the Stoic theory of the Plain Style were rejecting
the naQQr]aia of the Cynics for the eviQanekla of the Socratic writers.
If this is so, the source from which Diogenes Laertius derives this
portion of the life of Bion will probably be of the first century B.C.
or later ; unless we regard him as deriving directly from Panaetius
a likely guess would be Diocles.

3. As in the following examples : (a) Stob. n. 20. 7. * Bion says
that astronomers were ridiculous for pretending that they know all
about the fish in the sky, though they neglect the fish on the beach.'
Similar remarks are attributed to Diogenes, who * would marvel that
astronomers would look at the sun and the moon, and neglect matters
close at hand '. 7 Again, * a certain astronomer was exhibiting a map
of the heavens in the agora here, he said, are the eccentric stars

1 D.L., iv. 53

2 For a full discussion of the plain style see Fiske, op. cit., reference
in Index sub Panaetius.

3 D.L., vii. 59. 4 Fiske, op. cit., p. 73- 5 de Offic., i. 148.
6 ib., i. 128. 7 D.L., vi. 28.

92 A HISTORY OF CYNICISM

" Don't lie,'* said Diogenes, " the eccentrics are not there but here "
(pointing to the spectators).' 1 Astronomers, in fact, had been used
as examples of nohvnQayfJiovet; ever since the Thracian servant-girl
jeered at Thales. 2 (b) Another variation on the theme of nhavcbjLievoi.
' Bion said that grammarians who busy themselves on the wander-
ings of Odysseus are heedless of their own ; nor do they discern
that they are themselves astray on this very point, i.e. that they are
wasting their time on valueless pursuits.' 3 With this compare the
story that Diogenes * would wonder that men should study the woes
of Odysseus, when they are ignorant of their own '. 4 Wilamowitz
thinks that the similarity of these dicta of Bion and Diogenes is
explained by their occurrence in books of %Qeicu ; notably that
compiled by Zeno, and that the names have got mixed. Hense
accounts for the confusion by the familiar habit of the ancients of
quoting without acknowledging their sources.

4. The date of the Characters is taken to be 319 or earlier ; if we
take the statement of Diogenes Laertius that Bion studied under
Theophrastus after he had heard Theodorus, we get a date for their
association some time after 306. The delineation of character-types
had in the meantime been perfected by the poets of the New Comedy,
especially by Philemon and Menander, the latter also the pupil of
Theophrastus. That Bion was interested in the analysis of character
is confirmed by the apophthegms which appear in Laertius as well as
by passages in Teles generally assumed to be quoting Bion ; in
almost every case a parallel can be found in Theophrastus. Thus,
Bion retorts to an ddoM0%riG TO avov aoi nGioa), edv nctQaxhrjTovi;
nefjiyfli; xal avroq juf] eA0#g. 5 'Ado^ea^ia is the subject of one
of the Theophrastean character-sketches, x dv vno^vrj -cu; avwv
IJLYI d<piardaOai (naqacteiaavra drj delioix; roiovrov^ rcov dvOgtincov uai
diagajLievov dnaXMrreaQai). Again, Bion says of a wealthy miser,
* He has not acquired a fortune, it has acquired him ' ; and ' Misers
take care of their property as though it belonged to them, but get
no more benefit from it than if it belonged to others '. Of the
fiixQoA.oyos Theophrastus says, * ra>v juixQohoycw rag dQyvQo6r']xa<; eanv
Idelv ev^cortcocrag, airtovq d& (poQovvra^ eAdrrco ra>v furfQcov rd l^arta.

Of the other Theophrastean types, we find in Bion references to
the dhda>v, diaidai/i(jov, neyinoiQ&v . The ftdaxavos of D.L. 51
may be compared with the ao/ldyog of Theoph. xxviii ; and the
definitions of virtue, courage, prudence, &c., are in the vein of the
definition which Theophrastus always prefixes to his character-
sketches.

5. This is the view of Croiset, 6 von Hiller, 7 and Tarn. 8 Gerhard 9
and Powell, 10 however, urge that this vofioOeaCa more probably took

1 Stob., 2. 22. 2 Theaet., 1740. 3 Stob., 5. 4. 53.

4 D.L., vi. 27. 5 id., iv. 50. 6 Journal, d. Sav. y 1911.

7 P.W., s.v. Megalopolis. 8 C.A.H., Vol. vii, p. 755.

9 in P.W., s.v. Kerkidas. 10 Collect. Alex., p. 201.

CYNICISM IN THE THIRD CENTURY B.C. 93

place after the abdication of the tyrant Lydiades, i.e. some time later
than 235 ; Powell thinks that Cercidas may have been given supreme
authority for the purpose. Unfortunately the coinage of Megalopolis
gives no help ; but (i) the only occasion on which we are expressly
told of a vonoOeala in Megalopolis at this period is the year 217.
(2) Lydiades would seem to have been the most prominent man in
Megalopolis, even after he abdicated as a tyrant, down to his death
at the battle of Ladoceia. (3) The tone of the references to Cercidas
as aQiarot; vo/bioOerr^ imply that the code he drew up was successful.
If he had so distinguished himself as a lawgiver after the abdication
of Lydiades, why was there so much discontent and civil discord
at Megalopolis in 221 and the following years ? On the other hand,
Polybius says that the voftoOeala of 217 was satisfactory, * the terms
on which they composed their differences were engraved on a stone
and set up beside the altar of Hestia in the Homarium ' ; l (4) Polyb-
ius also implies that the code of Prytanis was rejected, and the final
settlement was due to the influence of Aratus. Cercidas was the
friend of Aratus, he had commanded the Megalopolitan contingent
at Sellasia, what more likely than that Aratus appointed him as
for his native city ?

6. The sequence of thought does seem intelligible, always admitting
that the uncertainty of the readings makes any interpretation highly
conjectural. For (i) on Knox's emendation, the first lines of fr. 8
are to be taken thus, * What driver of a team of four horses brightly
sparkling in the sun, would use to spur them a goad fitted for oxen's
flanks ? ' 2 (2) 8, lines 8-15, though fragmentary, contain un-
mistakable attacks on Sphaerus and his associates. ' This is the
pathway trodden of villains. ... O Stoic Callimedon (not alone
is Scylla the harlot evil , . .), 3 if thou dost yield aught to Sphaerus
(ZtpdiQio ya.Q al TI . . . nQopatys) . . . this leads not to virtue . . .
thou art a hunter after boys ( l^veveiq) 4 ... it bears a harvest of
madness.' (3) Fragment 9, lines 11-16, describe the Move of a
Zeno '. ' When thou shalt find a youth, formed in perfect harmony,
then shalt thou find equal desire, temperate (K* aardOsvrov : Powell)
and sweet. This is the love of man for man, this the love of a Zeno.'

The SQOX; ZavwvMog was notoriously homosexual, as his enemies
were not slow to point out. But Zeno's views on the subject were
evidently akin to the theory of sublimation through sexual love
developed in the Phaedrus ; * they say the wise man will love those
youths who by their countenance show a natural disposition to virtue.
Thus Zeno in the Republic' 5 So with the * image of a youth ' de-
scribed by Zeno, together with the physical characteristics we find

1 v. 93.

2 Reading nor' alokwnohov v di/Aonhrj&povaoq) pvcom

8 Powell, restoration suggested by Wilamowitz.

4 Thus Powell. B D.L., vi. 129.

94 A HISTORY OF CYNICISM

postulated d^06g vov<; nq6q rov "kbyov, dgvrrjs xai xaraxcoxf} ra>v
ogOcbs elQrjftevow . . . aldax; ftev InavQeiro) KOI aQQevconia. 1 We
have then two types of love contrasted, one that of Zeno, which is
dardOevrov (Powell aptly quotes Hor. Od. ii. 19. 28. * Me lentum
Glycerae torret amor meae '), the other that of Sphaerus, which is
* a pathway trodden of villains ', bringing an evil harvest. One thinks
at once of the diaoa nvev^ara QCOTO<; of the fragment previously
considered, the ' temperate love ' would be the * calm voyage governed
by the rudder of persuasion ', the love of Sphaerus the xa)f4aTta<;
dMov noQdpos. What then of the charioteer and the goad ? I
suggest that they are an adaptation of the famous simile of the
Phaedrus, which compares the soul of man to a charioteer and his
double yoke of horses. (That we are here dealing with a four-horse
team is no great objection.) The voyage of love is now made in a
chariot instead of a ship, and the violent breezes which provide a
stormy passage are here symbolized by the ox-goad, obviously a goad
too heavy to apply to a team of spirited horses.

1 von Arnim, Stoic, vet., fr. i, 246.

CHAPTER IV

CYNICISM AND THE PHILOSOPHICAL SCHOOLS
IN THE THIRD CENTURY

FOR the sake of clearness the relations between Cynicism and
the philosophical schools were not discussed in the last chapter.
The problem deserves a chapter to itself, which may well be
prefaced with a recapitulation of the aspects Cynicism pre-
sented. First, then, Diogenes and Crates were living examples
that autdOeia, in one form or another the End of all the Hellen-
istic philosophies, could be attained, at least through the
frugality of the XVVIKOS ftto<;. Second, the Cynic naqa^dqa^K;
emphasized in an extreme form the cleft between the Wise
Man and the accepted values of the age, a cleft which also
figured in most of the new systems. Third, by the middle
of the third century Cynicism had evolved a type of literature
TO anovdatoy^oiovy which offered definite genres both foi
popular exposition and for satire.

We shall find that the influence of Cynicism was most
potent during the lifetime of Diogenes and Crates, and rapidly
declined later. This is readily explicable : Cynicism was
then a novel phenomenon represented by men of striking
personality : further, the age was eminently one of the founding
of new philosophies. By the middle of the third century the
several schools had taken on their individual shape : a hundred
years later only the Stoics, Epicureans, and the New Academy
were of any importance. Of these, the New Academy had
no point of contact with the Cynics ; the Stoics accepted them
more or less as poor relations : the Epicureans were uncom-
promisingly hostile. This chapter is therefore mainly con-
cerned with the period c. 340-250 B.C.

(a) The philosophical school with which Cynicism first came
in contact was that of Megara ; for a time close relations seem
to have existed between that school and the circle of Diogenes.
Pasicles, the brother of Crates, was a pupil of Eucleides of

95

96 A HISTORY OF CYNICISM

Megara : 1 Stilpo 2 himself for a while came under the influence
of Diogenes, and in his turn gave instruction to the Cynic
Philiscus of Aegina. 3 One of the Dialogues of Diogenes bore
the name of the Megarian Ichthyas, while Stilpo named one
of his works after Metrocles. The influence of Diogenes is
discernible in the ethics of Stilpo, who made andQeia the end
of philosophy, and stressed the self-sufficiency of the Wise
Man, who would remain unaffected by the loss of his worldly
goods ; knowing that wisdom and knowledge could not be
taken from him. Teles, 4 teaching the Cynic doctrine that
exile is a matter of indifference to the wise man, cites as an
authority a passage of Stilpo. Like Diogenes, Stilpo urged
the necessity of philanthropy, in its widest sense ; Demetrius
the Fair is said to have been greatly impressed by his lecture
TIBQI evegysalag. 5 He joined in Diogenes' attacks on popular
religion : and apparently practised the iyHQarsia which was
a feature of their life. * The intimates of Stilpo ', says Cicero, 8
* describe him as a man naturally inclined to wine and women :
and in doing so they are rather praising him than the reverse.
;For, they add, none ever discovered him indulging these
ir ) iclinations ' and he concludes with the well-known story of
^ocrates and the phrenologist. It was probably through
i Stilpo that a diluted version of Cynicism influenced Menedemus
of Eretria, who was called by his enemies KVQOV xal AfJQos. 1
AfJQog evidently refers to his skill in controversy, KVWV prob-
ably to his habitual na^oia, perhaps also the frugality of his
well-known suppers, upon him the influence of Cynicism was
not of much weight. But Stilpo 's ethics undoubtedly joined
on to his logical studies and his doctrine of the One Good to
form a coherent individual system, though we lack evidence
to reconstruct it in detail. What is apparent is that his devotion
to logic brought down on him the inevitable Cynic ridicule ;
and Crates in his Ualyna attacked Stilpo for * wasting his
time on the verbal pursuit of apery \

(b) Stilpo 's influence, however, was short-lived ; Cynicism
was to contribute to a more enduring system, that of Zeno of
Citicum. After landing at Athens in 314, Zeno attached
himself to Crates the Cynic ; the reason for the attachment

1 D.L., vi. 89. 2 id., ib. 76. 3 Suidas, s.v.

4 Teles ncQt yvyfjg. 6 D.L., xi. 116. 6 de fato, 5. 10.

7 D.L., iii. 140

CYNICISM AND THE PHILOSOPHICAL SCHOOLS 97

is clear, Zeno recognized in Crates the ideal oocpog after the
pattern of Socrates. How long their association lasted is
not known, later Zeno passed on from Crates to the more
scientific teachings of Stilpo and Polemon. But the con-
tact with Crates had lasting influence on Zeno's philosophy,
and indeed on Stoicism as a whole. The core of the Stoic
system is admittedly ethics ; the core of Zeno's ethics is
the simplified version of the Socratic teaching preserved by
Diogenes and Crates, as a brief examination of his doctrines
will show.

The * End ' (rs'Aoc) of Zeno's system is defined in the
famous formula ' Life in accordance with the law of Nature '
(djuo^oyoviLidvax; rfj (pvaet, rjv) ; l here Zeno is borrowing and
expanding the r^Aog of the Cynics, which is * Life in Accord-
ance with virtue ' (XOLT' aqerrjv f^>). 2 The Cynics regarded
aqerri as Kara cpvaiv, but the (pvaii; of Zeno is an altogether
deeper conception and ofjiohoyovpevcoq rfj yvoei fjv meant
obedience to Universal Law, much as did Heracleitus' precept,
del SneoOcu ra> vvq>.

The Cynics, like Zeno, adopted the Tripartite division of
things into * Good, Bad, and Indifferent ' (dyada, ad, and
ddidqpoQo) ; Zeno went beyond them in introducing a further
Tripartite division of things ddidyoqa. With wealth and
good birth classed as nqoriy^sva (preferables), poverty, slavery,
and death as dnonQorj'yjueva (not preferables), the way was
clearly open for a pragmatism very different from the uncom-
promising morality of the Cynics, though such a course was
not followed by Zeno himself. We have seen from the frag-
ments of Crates how Cynicism emphasized the contrast
between the ao<pd$, safe in the Island of Pera, and the rest of
mankind storm-tossed on the sea of Illusion. The contrast
is preserved in Zeno's division of mankind into anovdaloi and
(pavhoiy of whom the former are uniformly happy, the latter
uniformly miserable. For him, as for the Cynics, Virtue is
independent as regards happiness, and once won cannot be
lost ; the oo<po<; is impeccable, and worthy of the love of his
equals. As already remarked, the cro^og of the Stoics is a
development along lines laid down by Socrates ; Zeno would

1 The evidence is on the whole in favour of the view that rfj <pvaei
was included in the definition of Zeno, and was not a later addition.

2 D.L., vi. 104.

8

98 A HISTORY OF CYNICISM

come in contact with another version of the Socratic teachings
in his studies at the Old Academy under Polemon. Antiochus
and Cicero, indeed, charged him with having taken his entire
ethical system from the Academy ; l but it is clear that Zeno
himself never admitted this. His own acknowledgements were
paid to Crates, as is shown by the fact that he wrote
the KQarrjTo<; oTTOfivrjjuovevjuaTa ^Ano^vri^ovev^ara formed a
recognized literary genre, the Memorabilia of a master written
by a pupil. Moreover, that the Stoics themselves admitted
that they received the Socratic teaching via Cynicism is to be
inferred from the reaction in the direction of Cynicism which
we find in Ariston of Chios, and from the canonization of
Antisthenes and Diogenes as Stoic saints.

The simplicity of the Cynic life was also copied by Zeno :
* after their pattern did Zeno of Citieum live his life '. 2 This
statement cannot be accepted in all its implications ; Zeno
never adopted the staff and wallet, for he never practised the
wandering mendicancy of a Diogenes ; he seems also to have
avoided the Cynic dvaldeta, which Diogenes displayed partly
for purposes of advertisement. But he wore the rqifiajv,
followed the frugal Cynic diet, drank cold water ; his temper-
ance passed into a proverb at Athens, and is amply confirmed
by the comedians. 3 * A single loaf of bread his food, figs
his dessert, water his drink ', says Philemon ; ' truly this man
teaches a novel philosophy to go hungry ; yet he gets dis-
ciples/ That his disciples were required to copy his own
frugality is the inference from the lines of Timon, c Meanwhile
he gathered around him a swarm of poverty-stricken creatures,
surpassing all in beggary, the most worthless people in town ' *
a description which recalls Aristophanes' abuse of the
companions of Socrates.

The ancient authorities agree that in at least one of Zeno's
works the Republic there was clear trace of Cynic influence.
From the taunt that it was written Im rfjg rov KVVO<; OVQOK; one
can suppose that it was published shortly after he had left
Crates for Stilpo, and still showed that he * had not let go of
the dog's tail '. 6 This agrees with the statement of the Stoic
apologetic quoted in Philodemus, that the book was written

1 de Fin., IV, et alia. 2 D.L., vi. 104.

8 id., vii. 27. * id., ib. 16.

6 D.L. says he wrote it while a disciple of Crates.

CYNICISM AND THE PHILOSOPHICAL SCHOOLS 99

when Zeno was still an imprudent young man. 1 The Cynic
naqa^dqa^iq appeared in the book in its treatment of incest,
cannibalism, and unnatural vice as not ' opposed to nature ' ;
and the Oedipus and Thyestes together with the Republic of
Diogenes formed fine material for the attacks of the enemies
of Stoicism. 2 The teachings of Diogenes about the abolition
of currency, temples, law courts, and gymnasia were adopted
by Zeno, as was the famous * community of women ' ; but in
making ".E^cog as the bringer of dftovoia, the ruling deity of
the ideal community, 3 Zeno was going beyond the Cynic ideas,
possibly to conceptions introduced by Alexander. In the
Republic, again, Zeno joined in the Cynic deprecation of the
Greek * liberal education ' (TO, eyxvxXia juadrj/taTa) : it is
suggested that in connexion with the Republic Zeno published
a series of works made up of the ' Homeric Problems ', ' On
the Hearing of Poetry ', * On the Greek System of Education \
as educational treatises, outlining an alternative curriculum,
in which the allegorical interpretation of Homer evidently
figured large. 4 This is a feature which can hardly have been
borrowed from Diogenes or Crates : Diogenes, as we have
seen, allegorized the story of Medea, but elsewhere he
deprecates the wasting of time on Homeric exegesis, a practice
apparently never indulged in by Crates. Zeno's source here
is pretty certainly Antisthenes.

To sum up, Zeno incorporated in his system the ooyos of
the Cynics : provided a logical and scientific theory which
showed this ethical ideal in its relation to the macrocosm ; and
by the doctrine of the jiQotjyjuevov made possible for his
followers a way of life that would avoid the Cynic narrowness
and fanaticism. Cynicism was, therefore, introduced into the
Stoic system by its founder, and a Cynic element formed
a left wing the dvdQcodeardrrj ErcMxrj 5 in the school through-
out its history. Of its occasional reactions against the neglect
on the part of official Stoicism of the practical aspects of
philosophy for the theoretical, the most powerful took place
in the generation immediately following Zeno, and gave rise to
the heresy headed by that interesting figure, Ariston of Chios.

1 Here. Pap., No. 339 (P), Col. xv.

2 See Note i to Chapter IV.

3 von Arnim, op. cit., Stoic, vet. fragmenta. i. 263.

4 Stein, Logik und Erkenntnis. der. Stoa. t n .689. 6 D.L., vi. 14.

ioo A HISTORY OF CYNICISM

(c) Ariston left the Stoic school while Zeno was ill, and
came for a time under the influence of Polemon. This must
have been earlier than 276,* but perhaps Ariston did not open
a school of his own till after the death of Zeno, i.e. probably
not till after 260 ; he lectured in the Cynosarges, as Antisthenes
had done. The teachings of Ariston represent a protest
against the additions with which Zeno had encumbered the
simple Socratic ethics he had taken from the Cynics. Two
of Zeno's branches of philosophy, Logic and Physics, were
rejected by Ariston ; Logic, he said, had nothing to do with
us, while Physics is far beyond our ken. 2 Dialectical reason-
ings he likened, in one of those comparisons for which he had
a gift, to spiders' webs, their workmanship is admirable, but
they serve no useful purpose. 3 Philosophy's sole concern is
with Ethics ; and in that sphere too Ariston tried to simplify
the system of Zeno. He rejected the tripartite division of
things adidyoQa, reaffirming the Cynic doctrine that every-
thing between virtue and vice is completely indifferent. 4
Moreover, Zeno had extended the category of things naia (pvatv
to cover the nQotfyjueva ; Ariston contended that none of the
adcd<poQa y health, disease, wealth, poverty, &c., is by nature
either desirable or undesirable, they are only to be judged xara
neqiaraoiv according to individual cases. He showed, for
example, that for the ooyos occasions might arise on which
he would prefer to die of disease than to live. 5 The ethical
system of Ariston posited a different r^Aog from that of
Zeno ; instead of ' a life lived in harmony with Nature ' we
are commended to * a life of complete indifference to every-
thing between virtue and vice '. To illustrate this precept he
borrowed Bion's simile of the Actor : the wise man will be
like the good actor who, whether cast as Thersites or Agamem-
non, will play his part well. 6 To continue with the simile, the
business of philosophy was to produce the good actor, not,
according to Ariston, to coach him in separate roles. For he
rejected not only Logic and Physics, but also one branch of
ethics, the vnoQetinos nal naQaivsrixot; ronot;^ This study,
according to Seneca, ' dat propria cuique personae praecepta
nee in universum componit hominem ' ; it gave advice on the

1 D.L., vii. 160. 2 von Arnim, op. cit., i. 351. 3 id., ib,

4 id., ib. 360. 5 id., ib. 361. 6 D.L., vii. 160.

7 von Arnim, op. cit,, 50. 358.

CYNICISM AND THE PHILOSOPHICAL SCHOOLS 101

conduct of marital affairs, on the management of servants, and
so on ; Cleanthes in particular seems to have devoted atten-
tion to it. Such precepts were rejected by Ariston as improper
for philosophy. They were too numerous and too particular
to be embraced under the * laws of Philosophy, which should
be brief and universal '. For, says Ariston,

consider the case of one giving precepts on marriage. He must
advise separately the husband who has wedded a virgin, and he
who has a wife who has known sex before marriage, he must provide
rules for living with (a) a rich wife, (b) one without a dowry. Must
he not also cater for, (c) a barren woman, (d) a prolific one ; (e) a
mother, (/) one who is a step-mother ? . . .

This was a field of study fitted rather for the nurse and the
schoolmaster : in any case it was superfluous for the aoqpd<;
who having grasped the central principles of agent] would
necessarily act virtuously in individual cases.

Ariston also differed from Zeno in his definition of the nature
of dQsrtf. 1 Zeno, by taking over the c four cardinal virtues '
of Plato, and regarding them as at once inseparable and distinct
from one another, had become involved in logical difficulties.
Ariston maintained that virtue is by nature one, an emanfi^r]
dyaOtov xai KCM&V, and the separate ' virtues ' such as Courage,
Justice, &c., that Ijuarrj^r] operating in a particular sphere.

Ariston resembles the Cynics not only in his teachings on
adiayoQia, and the uncompromising way in which he con-
centrates all the philosopher's powers on the pursuit of d^erry,
but also in his earnest description of philosophy as aam]ai<;
nal [id%r) y and his insistence on the fact that by nature we have
neither country nor lands nor possessions. We are told that
he fell away from his own ideals ; but none the less he was
an important figure in his day. His pupil Eratosthenes,
indeed, thought it miraculous that a single city should contain
at the same time philosophers of such eminence as Ariston
and Arcesilaus ; but Strabo in citing the remark adds that
therein Eratosthenes showed how foolish his judgement was,
that he should praise a man who left no successors rather than
the disciples of Zeno. 2 But Ariston had at least one quality
Zeno lacked, he was a most persuasive speaker, and was nick-

1 See Note 2 to Chap. IV.

2 See von Arnim, op. cit., i. 338.

102 A HISTORY OF CYNICISM

named * The Siren \ l He also had wit, as shown by his
description of Arcesilaus as a chimaera, * Plato in front and
Pyrrho behind, in the midst, Diodorus ', and his remark that
those who wasted their time on the synvxhia padrjiJiara, and
never studied Philosophy, were like the suitors of Penelope,
who spent their time seducing the maids and never came at
the mistress. 2 For a while his school seems to have attracted
more pupils than did the Stoa proper : and indeed it is possible
that Chrysippus deserves to be called ' the second founder of
Stoicism ' as much for maintaining the school against the rival
attractions of Ariston as in repelling the attacks of the
Epicureans and of Arcesilaus. But though the Ethics of
Ariston were more scientifically formulated than those of the
Cynics, yet his system resembled theirs in that it depended
largely on the personality of its leader, and lacked a compre-
hensive theoretical background which might ensure its survival.
Consequently we hear nothing of it after the first generation of
his pupils, amongst whom are known the names of Miltiades
and Diphilus.

Meanwhile, the development of the orthodox Stoic teaching
under Cleanthes and Chrysippus had been tending to lay less
emphasis on the Cynic element in Stoicism. True, both
retained the Cynic features of Zeno's Republic ; 3 but Chry-
sippus, in admitting that dyerr'] can be lost, and that there is
some profit to be derived from the eynmUa juadrj/Aara, is
dissenting from Zeno and the Cynics. 4 But above all the
great development made by Cleanthes in Physics, in Logic by
Chrysippus, had introduced into Stoicism a complexity little
to the Cynic taste. We have already seen the attacks made by
Cercidas on the dialectical studies of Sphaerus and his
followers ; if, as Helm thinks, the Symposium of Menippus
was a model for that of Lucian, it would seem that the Stoics
were there especially made mock of ; in any case it is likely
enough that they came in for their share of satire poured forth
on all the dogmatic schools by Menippus in the works ngoq
rovt; yvaixoix; Kal juaO^uari^o^ Hal y^a^aiiKO^. It is
interesting to learn that there were apparently retorts from
the Stoic side ; for Hermagoras, a pupil of Persaeus, wrote a

1 D.L., vii. 166. 2 von Arnim, op. cit., i. 350.

3 Philodemus negl ZTCOM ; cf. Cronert, op. cit., p. 53 ff.

4 D.L. vii. 127, 129.

CYNICISM AND THE PHILOSOPHICAL SCHOOLS 103

dialogue called Anti-Cynic (Miaoxticov). 1 Official Stoicism
indeed became increasingly opposed to Cynicism ; an opposi-
tion which culminates in Panaetius. From the fragment of
Philodemus 2 we see how the Middle Stoa tried to explain
away the offensive passages of Zeno and Diogenes ' Zeno
was only a young man when he wrote that . . .' * Anyway,
Diogenes didn't write the tragedies, they are the work of
certain wicked persons.' . . . Diogenes and Antisthenes were
still Stoic saints, and were accepted as such by Posidonius.
But the new Stoicism was determined to have no truck with
Cynicism in its own day ; * Cynicorum vero ratio tota eicienda
est.' The expulsion was never achieved ; there were still two
parties in the School as regards Cynicism. The controversy
is preserved by Cicero, who says that some Stoics held Cynicism
to be proper for the tfogpo'g, should chance lead him into it,
others that it was wrong in any circumstances. 3 The anti-
Cynics are presumably Panaetius and his school ; a repre-
sentative of the other party was Apollodorus of Seleucia, whose
floruit was apparently in the middle of the second century
B.C. He maintained that ' the aocp6<; will play the Cynic : for
Cynicism is a short cut to virtue.' 4 The same party held that
the (7o<pog, once a Cynic, would remain so. 5 The Stoic street
preachers in Rome during the latter half of the first century
B.C. were, as we meet them in Horace's Satires, Cynic in all
but name and tunic ; the Stoics always used Cynic literary
genres for what may be called their exoteric teachings. Thus
the Cynic element, present in Stoicism from its foundation,
was maintained throughout the three hundred years we are
considering, and indeed the noblest conception of Cynicism
ever formulated was to come from the Stoic Epictetus.

(d) The philosophic doctrine to which Cynicism was most
opposed was that which posited Pleasure as the End ; later
stories contrast Diogenes and Aristippus as the respective
extremes of asceticism and hedonism. But between Diogenes
and the elder Aristippus there was probably never any contact,
and we know too little about the life of the younger Aristippus
to know whether he can ever have met Diogenes. It is how-
ever certain that Hedonist doctrines were attacked by the
early Cynics ; we have already seen how Teles' diatribe neql

1 Suidas. 2 Cronert, op. cit., p. 53 ff. 3 de Fin., iii. 20, 68.
*D,L., vii. i2i, 5 Stob., 238.

io 4 A HISTORY OF CYNICISM

rov fjiri elvcu rthog r]bovr\v quotes Crates to prove that the
happy life cannot be judged by a favourable balance of pleasures.
But the doctrines of Aristippus were greatly modified by later
Hedonists such as Anniceris, Hegesias, and Theodorus, and
their systems had much in common with Cynicism, particu-
larly as regards contempt for accepted values. Scholars who
accept the ' successions ' given by Diogenes Laertius explain
this rapprochement on the grounds of a ' family likeness between
the minor Socratic schools ' ; l but Cynicism never was strictly
a Socratic school, as we have tried to show, and, moreover,
the * Cyrenaic ' succession as given by Diogenes Laertius is
notably open to suspicion.

A more probable explanation is simply that both the asceti-
cism of Diogenes and the sensualism of Aristippus were modi-
fied at a later period, and we have in Theodorus of Cyrene an in-
stance of contact between Cynicism and Hedonism. Theodorus
was a teacher of Bion at Athens shortly after Bion had been a
disciple of Crates, and it is very likely that he came under the
influence of Crates himself.

Theodorus 2 was an aristocrat of Cyrene, and had an eventful
life. He was twice exiled from Cyrene ; the fact that through-
out his career he seems to have been on friendly terms with
Ptolemy the Lagid points pretty certainly to the anti-Egyptian
risings in 322 and again in 313 as the occasions. Both times
he took refuge in Greece : and during his second period of
exile, some time between 313 and 306, we find him lecturing
at Athens and also at Corinth. At Athens his notorious
' Atheism ' got him into trouble, and he was only saved by the
influence of Demetrius of Phalerum from having to appear
before the Areopagus on a charge of impiety. Even thus ho
was expelled from Athens, and seems to have gone to the court
of Ptolemy. The king evidently thought well of him, for
later he sent him on an embassy to Lysimachus, but to judge
from the stories of his conduct on that occasion, diplomacy
does not appear to have been one of Theodorus' strong
points. 3 Later he returned to Cyrene, once again in Egyptian
hands, and was held in high honour by its ruler, Magas, a
brother of Ptolemy.

The philosophy of Theodorus rejected, with the Cynics,

1 As does Zeller. 2 Cf. D.L., f n. 98 ff.

8 Cic., Tusc., i. 43. 102; D.L., ii. 102.

CYNICISM AND THE PHILOSOPHICAL SCHOOLS 105

the principle that Pleasure (fidovrj) is the End ; his reasons were
probably those of Hegesias, that Pleasure is not always in our
control. As an improvement on Aristippus 5 opposition of
fldovri and novo<; he suggested %OQO. and \vnri ' cheerfulness
and grief, both states of mind depending respectively on
wisdom and folly ((pQovrjau; and ayQoovvr]). ' Cheerfulness
of mind ' had been of course a characteristic of Crates : though
we are not expressly told that this practical example had any
influence on the thought of Theodorus. The indispensability
of intelligence for the production of this mental cheerfulness
led Theodorus to insist as strongly as did the Cynics on the
gulf dividing the Wise ( the aocpoi or tpQovifjioi) from the
rest of mankind, who are mere fools (dygovet;). The wise man
is completely self-sufficient, and the standards which govern
the &<PQOV&(; cannot be applied to him. It was this doctrine
which caused Theodorus to be described later as an inciter
of his pupils to theft, adultery and sacrilege. Actually his
position was like that familiar in the last century Hell is an
excellent thing for the working-classes, but there is no need
for us to believe in it. The wise man will commit such actions
ev xaiQw, on occasions, of which of course he will be the judge,
for they are not by nature alo%Qa y though the opinion that they
are ala^qd is of value in keeping in order the foolish (Ivexa T%
rcov d<pQovcov 0vvo%fj<;). Theodorus probably discussed these
actions much as did Diogenes and the Stoics ; he is said to
have complained that his pupils misunderstood him, perhaps
they were more lenient in their interpretation of the clause
ev xaiQO). The self-sufficiency of the wise man would of
course recognize no ties of patriotism ; and Theodorus
expressly said that it was a good motion which resolves that
the wise man will not fight for his country. 1 With Diogenes
he affirmed that his true country was the Universe ; he even
went beyond the avraQxeia of the Cynic Sage by denying the
necessity of friendship. The nature of the ' atheism ' which
was the best-known feature of his philosophy cannot be
determined from the references. Cicero says that he totally
denied the existence of the gods ; 2 Clement of Alexandria 3
that he only denied the gods of popular belief. &6eo$ would
of course be used at both positions. Diogenes Laertius,
though admitting that he had read Theodorus' book On the
1 D.L., ii. 98. a de Nat. Deor., i. z. 8 Paed., xv. A.

io6 A HISTORY OF CYNICISM

Gods, does not definitely say which was his view ; but implies
that it was the second. 1 Though we cannot take literally
Laertius' statement that * Epicurus borrowed most of what he
wrote on the gods from Theodorus ', 2 we can see how
' atheism ' was necessary for Theodorus * philosophy. The
wise man cannot be self-sufficient if his avraQxeia is liable to
disturbance from the gods, an external agency over which he
has no control. Theodorus, like Epicurus, was concerned to
deliver mankind from * the fear of Heaven '.

Theodorus of all the Hedonists most closely approached
Cynicism ; the system of Hegesias, though joining in the
deprecation of external goods, denies that self-sufficiency can
be attained even by the wise man. Moreover, there is no
record of direct relations between Hegesias and any follower
of Cynicism.

(e) Of the Hellenistic schools of philosophy that of Epicurus
adhered most faithfully to the teachings of its founder and
kept the strongest hold on its adherents. Converts to
Epicureanism were numerous and apostates few for, said
its opponents, men may become eunuchs, but eunuchs can
hardly become men. 3 One of the precepts of Epicurus,
enunciated in his book On Lives, is that the Wise Man will not
beg, nor live as a Cynic ; 4 he is said to have described the
Cynics as * the enemies of Hellas J . 5 This hostility was
probably due to the repugnance Epicurus felt to the Cynic
avaideia ; certainly the life of the Epicurean Sage avoided
the Cynic naqa^dqa^iq of established law and convention.
For their part, the Cynics attacked the Epicureans for their
doctrines of r\bovr\ and for the elaborate physical and logical
aspects of their system ; two books of the satires of Menippus
were expressly directed against the Epicureans and their
reverence for the festival of their founder. 6 Polystratus, an
Epicurean of the later part of the third century, wrote a book
called n&Qi dhoyov xaTOKpQovrjoeax; which attacked amongst
others the * sect of the Cynics, who profess themselves to be

1 He says Theodorus completely rejected the dogai (popular
beliefs) of the gods. The story about the remark of Lysimachus'
minister, Mithras, * It seems you do not recognize kings either,
Theodorus ', suggests that Theodorus was dOeot; in the second sense.

2 D.L., ii. 97. 8 id., iv. 43. 4 id., ix. 119.
6 id., ib. 8. 6 id., vi. 101,

CYNICISM AND THE PHILOSOPHICAL SCHOOLS 107

anaOeis ' ; while in the neoi <pihoao<pla<; he describes them
as ' acting and speaking utterly at random \ the companions
of Bion, he says, may well be called dogs, for they go sniffing
round everything improper. The Epicurean system offers
the true philosophy, not a life of vagrancy. 1 The Cynic
Menedemus was one of the few whose tracks are seen leading
out of the lions' den of Epicureanism, and a personal con-
troversy raged between him and his former Epicurean master
Colotes of Lampsacus. Menedemus apparently attacked the
Epicurean deprecation of poetry ; Colotes replies that Mene-
demus does not understand the Epicurean position, and
interprets all too literally the saying of his own ally Zeno.
The dispute was apparently a lengthy one. Colotes attacks
Menedemus in the book Against Plato's Euthydemus. Mene-
demus, he says, ' keeps on bringing up reproaches against us ' ;
' even the Stoics are beginning to get tired of him ' ; ' they walk
up and down in the Stoa saying that Menedemus will not give
up his childish, foolish, trivial, and contemptible arguments.'
Colotes also attacked Bion in a controversial essay entitled
' That life is impossible on the systems of other philosophers '.
Epicurean polemic against the Stoics made great play with
the Cynic features of Stoicism ; and Philodemus, 2 castigating
the immorality of the Republic of both Zeno and Diogenes,
exclaims against ' those accursed beings who choose to live
the lives of dogs '.

(/ ) The Cynic spirit of antagonism to the dogmatists found
an ally in Timon of Phlius, and it is not surprising that in his
satiric writings Timon should have followed Cynic models.
Wachsmuth 3 points out that his Zihhoi are clearly an imitation
of Crates ; who himself parodied the Nexvta of Homer's
Odyssey and showed the wretched state of the philosophers
in Hades. Incidentally it is noteworthy that none of the
fragments of the ZiMoi attack any Cynic, though the Stoics
and especially Zeno come in for abuse. Timon was also
following Crates in his use of the iambic metre for purposes
of satire ; and in the numerous ' tragedies ' he composed he
may have been influenced by those of Diogenes. Indeed,
were it not for his exposition of the philosophy of Pyrrho, we

1 Cronert, op. cit., p. 36.

2 neQi TO>V ZTWM. Col. viii, Cronert, op. cit., p. 63.

3 Corp. poes. Graec. lud., Vol. ii, Introd.

io8 A HISTORY OF CYNICISM

should class Timon with Menippus as the outstanding literary
representatives of the Cynic nihilism.

NOTES TO CHAPTER IV

1 . We have said in dealing with Diogenes that these charges are
probably not to be pressed, and the caution applies even more
emphatically as regards Zeno, Probably the * shocking ' passages
in question amounted to little more than an argument that in certain
hypothetical cases even incest and cannibalism would be permissible ;
e.g. Chrysippus l seems to have argued that if a Wise Man and his
daughter were the sole survivors of some catastrophe which fell on
mankind incest would be permissible, * for the preservation of the
human race '. To say that the Stoics * recommended ' cannibalism
is absurd.

2. As the difference is not dealt with fully by Zeller, and is definitely
muddled by von Arnim in Pauly-Wissowa, it may be worth while
to examine the evidence here. I begin with the statement of Dio-
genes Laertius that * Ariston did not admit the existence of many
virtues called by many names, but treated it according to the theory
of relative modes * (ard TO 7tQo<; rC nax; e/eiv). 2 The ' theory of
relative modes ' is illustrated by a passage of Plutarch 3 Ariston
said that * virtue is by nature one . . . but in relation to separate
cases becomes many, as though for example our sight were called
" whitesight " when it saw white objects, " blacksight " when it saw
black objects, or something of the sort. So virtue, when determining
what should be done and what should not, is called ygovqais ; in
controlling desires, and appointing a limit and a season for pleasures,
it is called awqpQoavvr] , &c.' This illustration is borne out by a passage
of Galen ; 4 but Galen says that Ariston called dgm; an emartj^r]
dyaO&v x,ai xaxcov ; Plutarch that he called it vyieia. The last phrase
is clearly incomplete, vyiita as such was reckoned by Ariston amongst
the ddidtpoQa..* The vyieia must have been that of the logical portion
of the soul, a necessary condition for the functioning of the ejiumjfAri
dyaOwv nal xax&v ; Cleanthes adopted a similar theory in his account
of the i0%d<; yv%f)i; induced by rorog. 6 But it is evident that von
Arnim is wrong in asserting that Ariston found the essence of aQerr)
to be (pQ6vr]ai<;. In none of the passages which deal with his views
of dgerr) does (pQ6vt]oic, ever appear to be equated with it ; it is
always d^errj functioning in a particular sphere. That the equation
was made by Apollophanes, 7 a pupil of Ariston, is no evidence for
Ariston 's own position. And as a matter of fact this is apparently
precisely the point on which Ariston joined issue with Zeno. For

1 von Arnim, Stoic. Vet.fr., in. 743. 2 D.L., vii. 160.

8 See von Arnim, op. cit., i. 375. 4 id., ib. 374.

* id., ib. 361. 6 id., ib. 563. 7 id., ib. 406.

CYNICISM AND THE PHILOSOPHICAL SCHOOLS 109

Zeno's views on the nature of dQerrj we are dependent on two passages
of Plutarch ; l but they indicate chat Zeno was involved in difficulties
of logic. Apparently he adopted the four * cardinal virtues * of Plato,
regarding them as at once inseparable and distinct from one another ;
and attempted to define dvdgeCa, aaxpQocrvvr) and dixaioavvi] as
<pQ6vr)m<; operating in different spheres. Ariston was clearly trying
to provide a more logical definition of aqerci]. The point on which
he differed from the Megarians is not clearly brought out by Diogenes
Laertius ; he agreed with them that d^err} was * one called by many
names ' but added the qualification Kara, rty JIQOS ii G%aw* That
is, the Megarians presumably held that dixaioavvri, <pQ6vi]ai$ t &c.,
were equally valid synonyms for aQET/j ; Ariston that they could
be only used as ' accidental aspects ' of dgerfj. 3 Ariston's views of
the nature of aQerrj clearly imply a deprecation of the naQouveTtx6<;
t6no<; of ethics : once the emcmj/Lirj dyadcov xal xax&v is acquired
the virtuous performance of individual acts is assured.

1 id., ib. 200, 201. 2 Galen, Hipp, et Plato, vii. i.

3 The comparison with the phraseology of Herbart is made by
Zeller.

CHAPTER V

CYNIC INFLUENCE ON HELLENISTIC
LITERATURE

To complete the survey of Cynicism in the Hellenistic period
it remains to give some account of the development and
influence of the literary KVVIXOQ tQonoi;. Literary forms,
like animals, survive by adapting themselves to environment ;
the evolution of the KVVMO<; rgonoq is in the main an attempt
to adapt the * Socratic J forms of popular philosophical prop-
aganda to the requirements of the Hellenistic age. The
conversation and character of Socrates had given rise to the
Socratic dialogue, in the hands of Plato perhaps the supreme
achievement in prose form. The spirit of irony of Socrates,
and the brilliant fancy of Plato, had introduced into it an
element of the yttoiov in the shape of parody and myth. A
less serious form of composition was the ov/j,noalov ; and
the Memorabilia of Xenophon was the first work in a genre
which was to gain great popularity in the third century and
later. Finally, the epistle had been used for philosophical
exposition by Plato, Isocrates, and Aristotle. Such were the
traditional literary forms for philosophical propaganda available
at the end of the fourth century. The first literary produc-
tions of the Cynics seem to have been predominantly * serious '
y^novdatov) : Diogenes used the dialogue and epistle ; the
:ra S v 'pdies of Crates * bore the most solemn stamp of philos-
3 P"y >' r while his epistles * were written in a style closely
resembling that of Plato '. 1 But it was soon found that the
style suited ^ the intelligentsia of Athens was far above the
heads ot the L mdience to which the Cynics addressed them-
selves. Diogene, s himself discovered that ' when he spoke in
earnest on serious <, sub : ects> none stayed to hear him> but when
he began to whistle, a crowd soon gathered >. , Tfae common
people, unlike the e^ companions of Socrates, had

>D.L.,vi. 9 8 8 Md.,ib.a 7 .

no

INFLUENCE ON HELLENISTIC LITERATURE in

neither the leisure nor the inclination to ' follow the argument
wherever it might lead, not caring how many digressions were
made, provided that truth was attained in the end '.* They
wanted the lessons of philosophy presented ready digested, and
in an easily remembered form ; their tastes are fairly represented
by the collection of aphorisms, none of them more than three
words long, inscribed on a stone at Cyzicus, about the year
300 B.C. 2 Clearly for such an audience simplicity was all
yevxrtov f} rgrixela na^aiveaiq. Primarily to cater for their
needs were evolved those literary forms which comprise the
genus of TO anovdaioyehoiov ; the prose forms of which
were mainly the adaptation and popularization of ' Socratic '
literature ; while in verse the influence of the old gnomic
poetry, of the Mime, and of Comedy, are all discernible.

Of the prose genres the most highly developed was the
Diatribe. AiaTQiprj was of course originally synonymous
with diaAoyoQ as describing the conversations of a philosopher,
in the Apology Socrates says the Athenians are condemning
him because they cannot bear ra<; e^d<; dcar^dt; xai TOVQ
Ao'yovc. 3 It is probably in this sense that the writings attrib-
uted to Aristippus were called diaTQifidi ; 4 diatribe as a
literary genre appears to have been the work of Bion. We
have seen the chief characteristics of the diatribe as he developed
it its use of allegory, anecdote, and quotation, its appeals to
an imaginary adversary, &c. It is obviously a popularized
form of the dialogue ; as the diatribe is not a ' zetetic ' argu-
ment but an exposition, there is only room for one main speaker,
and the other characters of the dialogue are dispensed with,
or combined in the ' imaginary adversary '. The definition of
Hermogenes is worth quoting diarQifir} eari pQa%o<; diavorjjua-
rog fiQwr} 'dnGeaiq * Diatribe is a moral exposition of some brief
topic'. 5 After Diogenes the Cynics abandoned the * serious'
dialogue, though, as we have seen, the form was adapted for
comic purposes by Menippus.

The arcoiJLvrifjLovEv^ara was a genre obviously suited to the
purposes of the Cynics, and a closely allied form is the
&ro/m^ara. In theory these two forms are distinct, the
ajio/Avrjftovev/iaTa being the sayings, acts, &c., of a master
collected by a pupil, while the vno^vrnjiara is the scrap-book

1 Theaet. iyzD. *J.HS., xxvii. 3 syD. * D.L., ii.
'Rhet. Graec. Ill, p. 4060*.

H2 A HISTORY OF CYNICISM

of a writer or philosopher. We are told of Bion that he left
many memoirs . . . and expecially maxims having a useful
application (moyOey^ara %Q&id)dri nqayfjiareiav e%ovra) and
the^gWa, which formed the basis of the ajtojavrj^ovev^ara
and the feo/m^ara, was one of the chief weapons of Cynic
propaganda. The %Qela is, on the definition of Theon,
' ovvrojuos aji6(pQa.ai<; f} nQat;i<; /tex 9 evoro^iaf; avacpe^o^vri s'lg n
a)Qiaju,vov ngdaconov V i.e. an anecdote with a moral, attached
to the name of a well-known person (with the Cynics, of
course, notably Diogenes). Though the %Qela was not a
Cynic invention, it was one of their favourite forms, being
introduced into diatribe and even verse with great frequency.
Being short, easily remembered, instructive, and yet popular,
it was admirably adapted to their needs, and played a large
part in education, as we see from the * Wiener-Diogenes
Papyrus ' and the later Papyrus Bouriant. 2

The epistle, used as a serious form by Diogenes and Crates,
was turned to comic purposes by Menippus ; and the first-
century Letters of the Cynics are the chief contribution known
of Cynics of that period to TO onovdaioythoiov proper.

The ovjunoolov was used by Menippus and Meleager, similar
were the ovjunoTMol diahoyoi of the Stoic Persaeus.

For the Cynic propaganda verse was also employed. It had
of course always been one of the staples of Greek education
Lucian says that * The sayings of wise men and the great deeds
of old and moral stories are set to verse that they may be easily
remembered ' ; 3 we have seen that TO evjuv^juove^rov was
aimed at in the Cynic curriculum. Theognis, Simonides, and
Aesop had been popular in the circle of Socrates ; and both
tragedians and comedians had claimed to be the instructors of
the public * rcoAAd ju,ev yehoia /** emelv, noMa de onovdaia \
says Aristophanes. 4 But as a model for gnomic and satiric
verse it was necessary to go back beyond the fifth century to
such writers as Theognis, Hipponax, and Archilochus. Crates
was the first of the Cynics to revive the old measures : the
iambic, appropriate to satire from the time of Archilochus,

1 Prog. 6.

2 Cf. also Sen., ep. 336, '. . . pueris sententias ediscendas damus
et has quas Graeci chrias vocant, quia complecti illas puerilis animus
potest. . . .'

* Lucian, An., 21. 4 Frogs, 339.

INFLUENCE ON HELLENISTIC LITERATURE 113

appears in several fragments, notably in the ^(prujieqtq : elegiacs
are used for the * Hymn to Euteleia ' and the parody of the
epitaph of Sardanapalus : hexameters appear, naturally enough,
in the parodies of Homer. The early Stoics followed the
example of Crates, and we have iambics associated with Zeno,
Cleanthes, and Ariston, while hexameter is used by Cleanthes
in his famous ' Hymn to Zeus '. Cercidas, as we have seen,
invented a new metre, the * Meliambus ' ; the verses of the
London and Heidelberg Papyri ne^l dia%QOKd()dei,a<; employ
the choliambic measure.

The great quantity of moralizing verse which characterizes
the Hellenistic age cannot all be put down to the account of the
Cynics, though it is safe to say that Cynic influence gave the
first impetus to that literature. And it is noteworthy that this
gnomic poetry exhibits the same features as the moralizing
prose of the diatribe, the %Qia, and the ajzojuvqiuovevjua.
It abounds with quotation and parody, with anecdotes, and
with examples taken from the familiar figures of the past.
Heracles, Odysseus, Socrates, and Diogenes were the stock
heroes of the prose literature : verse adds new figures to the
gallery. Hipponax, a wanderer, a beggar, and noted for his
mordant wit, was obviously well suited to appear as * Anima
naturaliter Cynica ' ; so were the slave Aesop and the barbarian
sage Anacharsis. Poetic %Qiai and aphorisms could be
fathered on to the Seven Wise Men, one of several examples that
might be quoted is the anonymous epigram (Anth., ix. 366.)

Learn of the Seven Sages the city, the name, and the precept.
First Cleobulus of Lindus, who tells us that * Measure is best J ;
Cheilon, * Know Thyself ', declared in the valley of Sparta j

* Keep thy temper in hand ', the Corinthian sage Periander.

* Naught in excess ' is the word of Pittacus from Mitylene ;
Solon of Athens has said, ' See thou consider the end/

* Most men are mad * 'twas declared by Bias the wise of Priene.

* Put not thy name to a pledge ', warns us Milesian Thales.

For didactic purposes the verse of the older writers and
philosophers were parodied ; a Hibeh papyrus of 280-240
B.C. brings us some thirty lines of the Epicharmea of
Axiopistus (?) 1 ; parodies of Phocylides, Xenophanes and
Pythagoras were also in circulation in Hellenistic times ; and
both Gerhard and Wachsmuth conjecture that the collection
1 Pap. Hibeh, i. i ; Powell, op. cit., 219.

H4 A HISTORY OF CYNICISM

which has come down under the name of Theognis includes
Cynic additions.

The XVVMOS rqonoQ in literature was, as has been said, not
necessarily connected with the KWMOS /3lo<; ; and the popular
philosophy of the Hellenistic age has so many features in
common with Cynicism that it is difficult to decide where
Cynic influence begins and ends in the case of individual
writers of the period. For example, Gerhard l identifies
Sotades of Maroneia, the ' cinaedologus ', with a Cynic of
that name mentioned in a story by Gregory of Nazianzen.
The story derives from a late source, and the incident there
told of Sotades and Ptolemy is elsewhere related of Diogenes
and Alexander. 2 However, once the identification is made it
is easy to find the Cynic avaldeia in his obscene verses, and
the Cynic na^qriaia in his attack on the marriage of Ptolemy
Philadelphus and his sister Arsinoe. But of course obscenity
was not a monopoly of the Cynics, and if Sotades was true to
the Cynic naQgrjcrla in attacking a king, he was false to the
Cynic na^a^dQa^ig in rebuking incest. More convincing
evidence for Cynic influence on Sotades is the fact that he
wrote a Descent to Hades 3 as did Crates and Menippus ; further,
it seems likely that his poems contained moral precepts, for
such occur in verses quoted under his name by Stobaeus. 4
One may therefore conjecture that Sotades at least came under
the influence of the nvvwdg tqoTtot;^ as we have seen was the
case with Timon of Phlius. The same may be said of Chares, 5
whose verses on the avoidance of gluttony read like Crates,
and were actually assigned to the Cynic by Bergk. But in
claiming Phoenix of Colophon as a Cynic in the full sense of
the term, Gerhard is certainly rash. The story of Ninos and
the lines on aia%Qoxe()dei,a are not necessarily Cynic, and when
the * Chough-bearers ' is described as a Cynic begging-song
one must withhold assent, if not admiration. These are, how-
ever, minor figures ; the influence of Cynicism is discernible
in one of the greatest of Hellenistic authors, Leonidas of
Tarentum. Though one cannot with Gerhard regard pes-
simism 6 and contempt for death 7 as specifically Cynic, it
must be admitted that Leonidas approaches the Cynic evreXeia

1 op. cit., p. 245. 2 36. lOOoB. 3 Suidas.

4 Powell, op. cit., p. 240. 5 id., ib. p. 223.

6 As in A. P., viii. 472. 7 As in A. P. vii. 731.

INFLUENCE ON HELLENISTIC LITERATURE 115

in his description of his wandering frugal life in the following
poem.

Vex thyself not through all thy wanderings,
through all thy vagrant course from land to land
Vex thyself not, if but there be to hand
A hut, a fire for warmth, and simple things
For food a cake, kneaded from trough of stone
Relished with mint or thyme, or salt alone. 1

He shows an interest in the Cynics, writing on the death of
Diogenes, and on an unworthy follower of his ; and expands
into an iambic epigram Bion's remark that the road to Hades
is an easy one, for it can be travelled with the eyes closed. 2
His sympathy for the common people is well known, he sings
of the fisherman, the neatherd and the aged weaver. And in
one of the most striking of his epigrams an echo of Simonides
is turned into what Geffcken 3 justly calls a diatribe in verse :

Countless the years, O man, that have been ere ever

thou didst see the light, countless the years that will be when thou

art in Hades :
What measure of Life is left thee, but as it were a pin's point, or

aught that may be more meagre ?
Short verily is thy span of life, and even thus not sweet, but more

bitter than Death the enemy. . . .
Consider, O man, as day followeth day, how sorry is all thy strength,

and live a frugal life :
Ever be mindful in thy dealings with mortals, that thy nature is

a thing compounded of straw. 4

The influence of the KVVIKQC. r$6no<; on Hellenistic moraliz-
ing verse was powerful, though its limits cannot always be
precisely determined. In later times, too, the Cynic writers
of the third century B.C. were still a potent force. The dia-
tribe, in a particular, became an important literary genre,
and the influence of Bion thus affected not only the diatribes
of Seneca, Musonius, and Epictetus, but also the sermons
of Dio Chrysostom, and, at a later period, of Synesius,
Themistius, and Gregory of Nazianzen. 5 The old view of satire
as a purely Roman production has long been abandoned ; and
Fiske shows how marked is the influence of Bion's diatribe in
Lucilius and Horace. Menippus, again, was the model of
Varro in his Satirae Menippeae thus indirectly influencing

1 A.P., vii. 736. 2 Stob., I20. 3 Leon von tar., 131.

4 A.P., vii. 472. 5 vide Wilamowitz, Ant . von. Kar. exkurs Teles.

ii6 A HISTORY OF CYNICISM

Petronius and Seneca and is of course of great importance
for Lucian. It may be conjectured that the Cynic XQeiai
influenced similar Roman compilations, and it is certain
that as school-books they were widely used throughout the
Greek-speaking portion of the Roman Empire. A detailed
account of these developments falls outside the scope of this
book. Here we are only concerned to note how in * TO
GTtovdcuoyehoiov ' the Cynics evolved from the * Socratic '
literary forms and from the old gnomic poetry a powerful and
many-sided instrument for popular philosophical propaganda,
and that the KVVMOS rgonot; was a fertile influence successively
on Hellenistic, Roman, and later Greek literature.

NOTE TO CHAPTER V

i. Only a brief account would here seem necessary : the extant
fragments of Cynic literature have largely been discussed in connexion
with individual authors : and besides the ground has been covered
by the research of Geffcken, Fiske, Wendland, above all, Gerhard,
as well as by the standard histories of Alexandrine literature. This
chapter is simply a general summary of the KVVIXOS rgdnog as a whole.

CHAPTER VI

CYNICISM IN THE SECOND AND FIRST
CENTURIES B.C.

IN the life and literature of the third century the Cynics had
played a prominent part, but after about 200 B.C. strangely
little is heard of them. Cynic literary genres as perfected by
Bion and Menippus certainly influenced Roman satire ; but
there are very few references to Cynicism as a still observed
evcttaGu; plov till the revival in the first century of our era.
Zeller indeed supposed that the movement entirely died out,
and that the revival alluded to was really a rebirth of Cynicism
out of Stoicism. This is certainly not the case ; we do possess
evidence that Cynicism continued during the second and first
centuries B.C., though it was obscure and unimportant. Before
setting out this evidence it is pertinent to suggest causes for
Cynicism's lengthy eclipse.

A consideration of the history of the movement itself during
the third century reveals one set of causes. The Cynics were
so called as the followers of Diogenes of Sinope ; the founder
of Cynicism was a man of outstanding personality, and he had
a worthy pupil in Crates. But of course a succession of such
4 originals ' was not to be expected, the next hundred years of
Cynicism failed to produce a man of the Oavjuaarri neiOco 1
of Diogenes. Bion was a brilliant figure, but there was in him
too great a discrepancy between precept and practice to win
many converts, and Menippus does not seem to have ' taught '
at all. The decline in personality from a Diogenes to a Teles
is obvious. Now a school of philosophy with a definite
theoretical background, like a well- organized state, can survive
and even prosper without men of genius ; Epicureanism is not
marked by a man of any real distinction between Epicurus and
Lucretius. But Cynicism had never had such a background :
its appeal lay in the character of its adherents. Moreover, as
the first of the new * philosophies of retreat ', Cynicism as
\D.L., vi. 75-
117

n8 A HISTORY OF CYNICISM

represented by Diogenes and Crates, had attracted men of
such intellect as Zeno, Stilpo, and Menedemus. But by the
end of the third century the essential features of the Cynic
system, the avraQxeia and ajzaOeia enjoyed by its ooyos,
were to be found without the Cynic squalor in Stoicism and
Epicureanism, which also gave a comprehensive theoretical
background. The weakness of Cynicism lay in its inability
to give an account of itself (hoyov didovai) ; now that its adherents
could not command the ' persuasive charm ' (tvyf) of a
Diogenes, it could make no appeal to the intelligence.
Cynicism thus became a * popular ' philosophy ; the philos-
ophy of the proletariat as it has been called, and the descrip-
tion will serve provided one avoids the implications such a
phrase would carry to-day. Moreover, the Cynic himself was
becoming a familiar rather than a remarkable figure, and his
avaideia ceased to shock ; we now regard a communist orator
as part of the furnishings of Hyde Park rather than as a fore-
runner of the Red Dawn.

But an even more potent set of causes for the eclipse of
Cynicism were those produced by the great shift in the centre
of gravity of the civilized world to Rome. The ultimate
fusion of Greek and Roman culture achieved in the Roman
Empire tends to obscure the fact that many features of the
older civilization were not to the taste of the Rome of
the Republic. ' Captive Greece took captive her proud
conqueror ' ; yes, but truth has been sacrificed for effect.
Rome only took what she wanted from Greece, and she did
not want Cynicism, at least as an evaraaig plov for some time
to come. Philosophy had to meet the tastes of the Roman
aristocracy with their traditions of * gravitas ' ; such men as
Scipio Aemilianus or Laelius would have regarded Cynicism
as offensive vulgarity. They found what they wanted in the
modified Stoicism of Panaetius and Posidonius, a nice blend
of Stoic aQSTT) and Roman ' virtus '. One of the achievements
of Panaetius was to purge Stoicism of the Cynic features which
had marked it under Zeno and Chrysippos ; how hostile the
new Stoicism was to Cynicism can be gathered from the reflec-
tion of its criticism in Cicero. 1 For indeed, Cynicism had

1 e.g. De Officiis, i. 148. ' Cynicorum vero ratio tota est eicienda :
est enim inimica verecundiae, sine qua nihil rectum esse protest,
nihil hones torn.*

IN THE SECOND AND FIRST CENTURIES B.C. 119

flourished in a ' Zeitgeist ' very different from that which now
prevailed at Rome. The age of the Diadochi had been one of
a growing distaste for politics, and politics at Rome in the last
days of the Republic ran a course whose very turbulence is a
tribute to their vigour ; it had seen the decay of the city-state
and the spread of cosmopolitanism, while Roman nationalism
was still vigorous ; its keynote was a * world- weariness ' which
was not felt at Rome till the end of another hundred years of
civil war and bloodshed. Admittedly certain features of the
Hellenistic age which had provided material for the preachings
of Cynicism, a great increase in luxury, and gross inequality
in the distribution of wealth were just as prevalent in
Republican Rome. But Rome had her own contrast to those
in the ' antiqua virtus ', without calling on the material of the
Cynics. Why cite Diogenes as an example of virtuous poverty
when Cincinnatus and Cato lay to hand ? Again, no need to
go back to the mythical labours of Heracles to emphasize the
virtues of novos, they could be demonstrated by the * proles
Sabella ' and their hard life in the fields. It is worth noting
that in Satires 2. 2, Horace, in enunciating educational pre-
cepts which are in the familiar Cynic-Stoic tradition, places
them on the lips of that exemplar of Italian peasant virtue,
the farmer Ofellus. 1 Rome had her own ideology in these
matters * malo unum Catonem quam trecentos Socratas '
and there is no reason to suppose that in the Republic
Diogenes would have commanded a much better rate of
exchange.

For all these reasons, Cynicism was known at Rome mainly
as a literary phenomenon, as an examination of the evidence
shows. The references to Cynicism in the Roman Comedy 2
do not justify the assumption that it was a familiar thing at
Rome, for Plautus and Terence derived their material from the
New Comedy of Greece, in which such references were fre-
quent. Nor can we assume with Hirzel 3 that Varro had an
' early phase of Cynicism ' because he wrote ' satirae Menip-
peae '. Admittedly he is called ' Cynicus Romanus ', but the
reference is to his imitation of Cynic Satire : he is the ' Romani
stili Diogenes '. 4 As Cicero makes him say, * he did not so

1 Cf. Fiske, op. cit., pp. 379 ff.

8 Cf. Plautus Stichus, 5. 4. 22 ; Pers., 120-5.

8 Der Dialog., 441, note 2. * Tert., Ap. 14.

izo A HISTORY OF CYNICISM

much translate Menippus as imitate him ' ; * it was a Romani-
zation of a Greek literary form, much as were the satires of
Lucilius and Horace. Street preachers were familiar enough
in Rome towards the end of the first century B.C., as we gather
from Horace's references to such persons as Fabius, Crispinus,
and Stertinius. The discourses of these men were Cynic
diarqipdi in their improvisatory nature, in their use of stock
exemplars and similes, and in the lessons they inculcated
avoid jueftyijuoiQlay live simply, know that virtue is indepen-
dent of externals in regard to happiness, satisfy your sexual
desires with as little trouble as possible. 2 There is nothing to
distinguish them from the Cynics of Hellenistic times as far as
their creed goes, but they call themselves Stoics ; they resemble
the Stoics who * differ from the Cynics only in dress ' alluded
to by Juvenal. But that the xwixog /?/o was not wholly
unknown at Rome is to be inferred from an allusion in one of
the mimes of Laberius to the * Cynica haeresis ' ; ' sequere in
latrinum, ut aliquid gustes a Cynica haeresi ' ; 3 which suggests
that the audience would be familiar with the Cynic &vaideia.
Still more significant is a passage of Cicero's Academica (1-2)
where Varro is discussing the possible variations of philo-
sophical sects. All sects of philosophy, he says, may be
followed, ' according to the Cynic, or to the conventional,
garb and rationale ' (' habitus et consuetude '), which does
suggest that the Cynic * habitus et consuetudo ' were known at
Rome. A person with a more genuine claim than that of
Varro to the title of * cynicus Romanus ' was Marcus
Favonius, the devoted adherent of Cato the younger. Born
about the year 90, he makes stormy entrances on the political
scene from the candidature as tribunus plebis in 6 1 to his
capture by Octavian after Philippi. Cynic at least are his
naqQrioia and his fierce opposition to luxury ; it was during
his aedilship that Cato gave the famous games at which expenses
were so ruthlessly reduced, and we hear of a speech of his in
support of a sumptuary law. The most characteristic story
about him is that in Plutarch's Brutus. Before the battle of
Philippi Brutus and Cassius were on bad terms ; a meeting
was held to compose their differences. The meeting was in
private, and to judge from the angry voices heard by those

1 Acad. t 1.8. a See Fiske, op. cit., index.

8 Comptialia, fr. 3.

IN THE SECOND AND FIRST CENTURIES B.C. 121

outside the tent, it was anything but friendly. None had the
courage to intervene but Favonius. * A man ', says Plutarch,
' more impetuous and frenzied than reasonable in his devotion
to philosophy, 1 but amusing enough, if you could tolerate his
impertinence.' Brushing aside the attendants, Favonius burst
into the tent, in true Cynic style with a line of Homer on his
lips, * Listen to me, young men, for I am your elder in years.'
Brutus thrust him out with the trite pun which one would
expect from him. ' You call yourself a Cynic, Favonius, but
you are really a dog.' But at dinner that night Favonius
turned up uninvited, and sat down between the now reconciled
leaders : there was much wit and learning shown in the con-
versation, we are told. The Cynic naQQr]ata also appears in
Favonius' attacks in the Senate on Ptolemy Auletes, in his
opposition to the Triumvirs, and his abuse of Octavian for his
brutal treatment of the prisoners taken at Philippi. But in
his devotion to the cause of the Republic, in good days and in
bad, and in his attempts to bring back the ' antiqua virtus ' of
a bygone Rome he was the follower of Cato rather than of
Diogenes. 2

Cynicism did, then, apparently succeed in gaining a footing
in Rome during the first century B.C., though it appears in an
altered form and is of no great importance. The evidence
for its survival in the Greek world during this period is equally
scanty, though less ambiguous. One name is indeed men-
tioned as that of a Cynic, and a surprising name it is ; that of
Meleager of Gadara, weaver of the famous Stephanas, and
author of some of its most graceful and sensuous pieces.
Yet the tradition is unanimous ; the Cynic in Athenaeus*
Deipnosophists permits him to be called 6 n$6yovo$ v/ta>v and
6 KWMoq ; 3 Diogenes Laertius classes him with Menippus ;
and Meleager 4 himself speaks of the axrjnTQoyoQOG ooyia on
which he had prided himself, but which is now overmastered
by Love. Meleager was presumably born about 135, for his
floruit is given c. 96 B.C. He tells us himself the main details
of his biography ; he was born at Gadara (' in Syria, but Attic

1 Plut., Brutus, 34. One thinks of Agricola, who but for his
mother's care might have become * more learned in philosophy than
was proper for a Roman and a gentleman '. Tac., Ag. 9 4. 4.

2 Cf. Plut., Brut., 34 ; Caes., 21 ; Dio Cassius, 38. 7 ; 39. 14*
8 1576 ; 5020. 4 Anth,, xii, 101.

122 A HISTORY OF CYNICISM

for all that ', he claims), passed his early manhood at Tyre,
and finally went to live at Cos. Since he lived to a ripe old
age, his death probably took place c. 50 B.C. His earliest
literary venture was to write satires after the manner of his
fellow-countryman Menippus %aQirs(; he calls them, and
says ' they rival with the Muses* aid the Graces of Menippus '.
Only a fragment of them is preserved, in which it is claimed
that Homer was a Syrian, ' for the Syrians do not eat fish, nor
does Homer allow his heroes to do so, though the Hellespont
abounds with them '.* He also followed Menippus in writing
a Symposium ; another work on a Cynic theme was that
entitled AeniQov ncd (paufjt; owyxQiai<;. 2 The last-named was
presumably a humorous description of the Cynic diet, whose
range was comprised in the choice between Lentil soup thick
or clear. As is to be expected, there are few traces of Cynicism
in the poems of Meleager contained in the Garland, though an
expression of the Cynic cosmopolitanism is found in the epitaph
he composed for him, * If I am a Syrian, what wonder in that ?
Stranger, we are citizens of one city ; the universe : one
Chaos is the begetter of all mortal things.' From the evidence
of the epigrams it is clear that Meleager was no follower of the
XVVMOI; /?to as defined by Diogenes, he was a Cynic after the
persuasion of Teles, who in enunciating the principle * There
must be no indulgence in luxury ', added the saving clause,
* unless circumstances are favourable J . 3 Circumstances seem
to have favoured Meleager ; 4 but there is evidence that that
asceticism still survived amongst the Cynics. Diocles of
Magnesia, the friend to whom Meleager dedicated the Garland,
had a particular interest in Cynicism and was evidently one
of Diogenes Laertius' chief sources of information about it.
In one passage based on Diocles the reference seems to be to
Cynics of Diocles' own day. After discussing the individual
Cynics, Diogenes Laertius gives some account of * their common
doctrines ' (ra uoivfj aQ^axovta

They hold that we should live frugally, eating food for nourishment
only and wearing nothing but the TQipow, and they despise wealth
and high birth and fame. Some of them live on vegetables and

1 Athea ? 157^ 2 id., ib. 8 Tel, Ret., p. 41. 6.

4 Ermatinger, in Virchow. Samm., N.F. 13, calculates that * he
mentions 14 persons of both sexes, in terms of amorous passion '.

IN THE SECOND AND FIRST CENTURIES B.C. 123

drink only cold water, and are content with any kind of shelter, or
with tubs, as Diogenes had been. . . . l

That the * Cynicus habitus J at least was known in Greece in
the Augustan age is to be inferred from an epigram of Antipater
of Thessalonica 2 on a degenerate Cynic.

They cry shame on you, the wallet, and the stout staff of Diogenes
of Sinope, meet weapon for a Heracles, and the doubled cloak
bespattered with filthy mud, protection against bitter showers, they
are befouled by hanging from your shoulders. Truly Diogenes
was the Heavenly Dog, but you the dog of the dust heap. Put off
these weapons that are not yours ; the lion's array is not for bearded
goats.

Apart from the works of Meleager, there is little evidence
of literary activity amongst the Cynics of this period. Berlin
Papyrus, No. 13044, is dated by Wilcken 3 as c. 100 B.C. and is
an echo of Onesicratus' description of the Gymnosophists.
Alexander, however, does not receive favourable treatment, he
is the rvqavvoQ finally discomfited by the wisdom of the
Gymnosophists, who wear the cloak of the Cynics. There is
little or no literary merit about the fragment, it is a popularized
version of the theme of an encounter between Cynic and
tyrant : a theme later elaborately treated by Dio Chrysostom.
The first half of the first century B.C. is apparently the date of
the * Wiener Diogenes Papyrus ', a collection of anecdotes, most
of which are in Laertius' account of Diogenes. The so-called
4 letters of the Cynics ' date in part at least from the Augustan
age. 4 They purport to come from Antisthenes, Diogenes and
Crates, but as von Fritz 5 shows, evince no sign of acquaintance
with the works of their supposed authors, their knowledge of
whom derives from the accounts built up by the %Qeiai and the
fictitious Diogenes-literature of the third century and later.
Frequently they are merely elaborations of familiar Cynic
anecdotes, e.g. the story of how Diogenes learned to dispense
with his wooden drinking-cup ; others again are dialogues
narrated in a letter. The remarkable 28th epistle of Diogenes
is addressed to the Greek race as a whole, and is a bitter polemic
against the general standards of contemporary civilization.

1 D.L., vi. 104. a Anth., xi. 158. 8 Berlin, Ak. Sits:., 1923.

4 Capelle, De Cynic, epistulis, Gott. Diss., 1896.

5 Diog. 9 von Sin.

124 A HISTORY OF CYNICISM

From the number of references to tyrants and the misery of
their lot in the epistles it is likely that many of them were
composed in the Early Roman Empire. The purpose of the
epistles may well have been, as Capelle suggests, to provide
propaganda for the revival of Cynicism in the first century
A.D. The absence of any individual character makes it hard
to date them, but their anonymity is a true reflection of a period
when the * Cynic philosophy ' resembled nothing so much as
an hereditary collection of well-worn gramophone records.

This completes the examination of the evidence for the
survival of Cynicism during the last two centuries before
Christ. We have seen that it did little more than gain a
footing at Rome, and was presumably unknown elsewhere in
the West ; in the Eastern half of the Mediterranean world it
survived in obscurity, attracting far less attention than had
been the case in the third century. Though Cynic writings
of the best period still exert a considerable influence on
literature, little new literature is found coming from the move-
ment. Surveying the state of Cynicism at the end of the
Augustan age, we should not be inclined to predict for it a
revival and at least another five hundred years of life. But
history was repeating itself, at least, in so far as it ever does ;
that is to say that the conditions which had proved favourable
for the growth of Cynicism after the death of Alexander were
being reproduced in the early years of the first century A.D.
The Imperial system, though an enormous gain in efficiency
of administration, had taken the interest out of politics ;
there was a great increase in cosmopolitanism ; finally, luxury
was more rampant than ever, and philosophy, even Stoicism,
had compromised with it. There was a demand for a simpler,
practical creed, which Cynicism was to meet. The * lion's
array ' of Diogenes would again find worthy wearers ; Cynic-
ism was to be, not reborn, but revived.

CHAPTER VII

DEMETRIUS. THE 'PHILOSOPHIC OPPOSITION
IN THE FIRST CENTURY A.D.

THE first name heard of after Cynicism's long period of
obscurity and anonymity is that of Demetrius. 1 If no Cynic
of the previous two hundred years stands in so clear a light,
it is but another indication of how during this period interest
focuses on Rome. Men may have followed the Cynic life
with commendable, if not equal, austerity in Greece or in
Asia Minor, but their names have not survived because they
lacked Roman admirers. Demetrius carried on his propa-
ganda at Rome, and aroused the interest of the Roman nobility,
whose influence is paramount in the Latin literature of the
period. If, then, he appears as an isolated phenomenon, this
is probably misleading.

Demetrius would seem to have been born earlier than A.D. 10 ;
nothing is known of his family or his earlier years. We first
hear of him as attracting attention in Rome during the reign
of Caligula 2 ; for Seneca says that he has heard from
Demetrius' own lips how the Emperor had offered him
200,000 sesterces, which he had refused. * It would have cost
him his whole Empire ', the Cynic would add, * to induce me
to change my way of life.' From this passage von Arnim 3
deduces that already Demetrius was noted for the ' anti-
monarchical radicalism ' that he showed under Nero and
Vespasian. This assumption would appear to read more into
the passage than is warranted ; and a more probable explana-
tion is that the story of Demetrius' poverty and asceticism,
which were remarkable even by Cynic standards, had provoked
Caligula's erratic curiosity to discover whether such virtue
was indeed proof against the temptation of wealth. The
language of Seneca supports this view : the Emperor is trying

1 See Note to Chap. VII. 2 Sen., de ben., vii. n.

3 In Pauly-Wissowa v. sub Demetrius, 91.

125

126 A HISTORY OF CYNICISM

' aut honorare aut corrumpere Demetrium ', who rejects the
gift with scorn as being ' not even worth refusing ' (' ne dignam
qua non accepta gloriaretur '). Moreover, had Demetrius
really been a troublesome opponent, it is unlikely that attempts
to silence him would have stopped at unsuccessful bribery.

The next references belong to the early years of Nero, and
show Demetrius as a well-known figure in Rome, unsparing
alike in his own asceticism and in attacks on the luxury of the
age. He was probably in Rome thenceforward till the death
of Thrasea Paetus in 66 l ; in addition to his connexions with
the curious coterie that surrounded Thrasea, he was cultivated
by Seneca, alike when minister of Nero and in retirement.
After the death of Thrasea he appears to have been banished
from Rome and to have lived in Greece, 2 but he must have

1 Philostratus has a story that he taught at Corinth during some
part of this period ; that there he came under the influence of Apol-
lonius of Tyana, whom he followed to Rome, but shortly afterwards
(we are to infer) was expelled by Tigellinus for attacking the Thermae
of Nero as useless and demoralizing extravagance. The details of
this story do not bear examination. The Thermae were built in 60,
but Tigellinus did not come into power till 62, and since Philostratus
says that the attack was delivered on the completion of the Thermae,
it must have taken place (if at all) after their rebuilding in 66. But
in the Epistles to Lucilius y composed between 57 and 64, Seneca refers
several times to Demetrius in a way which suggests he was then in
Rome, and in the De Providentia, which is generally dated A.D. 62,
says definitely that he has just been in his company (' a quo recens
sum ', de Prov., 3, 3). It is certain that Demetrius was with Thrasea
Paetus at his death in 66, and hardly questionable that he had then
been in close touch with him for several years. A visit of Demetrius
to Greece between the years 57 and 66 is therefore unlikely, at least,
it is hardly conceivable that he could have been there long enough
to gather about him a crowd of disciples, as Philostratus suggests.
He may well have been banished just after 66, but for more serious
reasons than an attack on the Thermae ; Nero was very tolerant of
such criticism. And it is a comment on the value of Philostratus
as evidence that he does not mention Demetrius' connexion with
Thrasea ; though he can give a detailed account of how the Cynic's
' pupil * Menippus escaped in the nick of time from being married
to a vampire.

2 It must be admitted that the evidence on this point is scanty.
Epictetus quotes him as being undismayed when threatened with
death by Nero, which suggests most naturally that proceedings were
taken against him after the death of Thrasea. Philostratus, as has
been said, states that he was banished for criticizing the Thermae,
and further states that he met Musonius engaged on digging Nero's

DEMETRIUS 127

returned to Rome soon after the end of Nero's reign, for we
find him opposing Musomus Rufus in the prosecution of
Egnatius Celer. In vituperation at least he was the most
prominent of the philosophers who opposed Vespasian, and
was expelled from Rome in 71 . Of his later life little is known ;
but it seems likely that he lived in Greece, to judge from the
stories of his encounter with Vespasian and his influence on
Demonax. Philostratus represents him as living at Dicae-
archia in Italy during the later years of Domitian, with what
truth is unknown.

The teaching of Demetrius, at least so far as it can be
recaptured from the references in Seneca, seems to have been
in the familiar tradition of the austerer Cynicism. The
insistence on the practical aspect of philosophy, and the
consequent depreciation of theory and of scientific speculation,
contempt for the unconverted mass of humanity, complete
suppression of desires, attacks on the luxury of the age all
are in the well-known vein of the gospel according to Diogenes.
For the opponents of convention had standardized both the
manner and the matter of their assault into a conventional
form, which demanded of its expositors no originality of
thought, but rather, at best, unimpeachable asceticism and
sufficient wit and rhetorical power to hold the attention of an
audience. The only passage whose thought does not quite
harmonize with that of traditional Cynicism is one where
Demetrius professes complete and unquestioning resignation
to the Will of God. Resignation, indeed, the older Cynicism
had counselled, but rather resignation to Fate ; and one
cannot but suspect that the religious colour of the passage may
be due rather to Seneca than to Demetrius. Even if it is true
for Demetrius, it is probably a borrowing from contemporary
Stoicism. The apophthegms quoted by Seneca bear evidence
of Demetrius' powers of expression ; that which calls a life
which has never borne the attacks of Fortune a Dead Sea,
is perhaps the most striking. But for us Demetrius is
chiefly interesting not for his teaching or for a few striking

Isthmian Canal. Chronologically there is no objection to these
stories ; the Thermae were completed in 66, the Canal begun in 67.
The story in Lucian (adv. indoct., 19), which shows Demetrius at
Corinth, does not help, as it cannot be assigned specifically to the
years 66-9.

128 A HISTORY OF CYNICISM

phrases, but rather for the appearance he makes in Roman
history.

The association of Demetrius with Thrasea Paetus and his
circle is the most valuable piece of evidence for the so-called
' philosophic opposition ' which is such an interesting feature
of Roman politics in the second half of the first century A.D.
The precise nature and extent of this opposition have been
very variously estimated. Dio Cassius says that Thrasea and
Soranus were killed, not for what they did but for what they
were ; a point which Tacitus makes in his own way by telling
how Nero, as the culmination of his Reign of Terror, deter-
mined to attack Virtue Incarnate in the person of Thrasea
Paetus. Boissier, 1 in saying that the opposition was * plus
morale que politique ', also implies that its persecution was the
revenge of outraged vice on virtue. But, as Henderson justly
remarks, 2 ' a mere dislike of arrogated superiority in morals is
not quite an adequate explanation of a rigorous treatment ' ;
and one remembers that similar rigour was employed by
Vespasian and Domitian. The circumstances of the attacks
made on the Stoic opposition by the three emperors are very
similar ; in each case a prominent Roman aristocrat of Repub-
lican sympathies was put to death, and Cynic and Stoic phil-
osophers were banished from Rome. This differentiation in
the punishment accorded to the two elements of the opposition
shows how the authorities estimated the relative degree of
political danger they represented ; and any analysis of the
opposition must recognize its twofold nature. For, though
the Roman aristocrats might be in agreement with their Greek
philosophical directors in allegiance to Stoic ethical doctrine,
they cannot have taken their political views from Zeno or
Diogenes. Thrasea, Helvidius Priscus, Paconius Agrippinus
and the rest, represent a resurgence of the old Roman aristo-
cratic spirit which found its true embodiment in Cato, and it
was an essentially Roman tradition, and not Stoicism, which
governed their political outlook. Admittedly the mind of a
Cato is an ' anima naturaliter Stoica ' ; but the Roman
Republic, though idealized by Panaetius, was always different
from a Stoic commonwealth. Early Stoicism had defined the
best constitution as being a blend of kingship, oligarchy, and

1 U Opposition sous les Ctfsars, p. 103.

2 Life and Principate of the Emperor Nero, p. 295.

DEMETRIUS 129

democracy ; but the insistence on the Stoic paradox of the
fiaoik&ia enjoyed by the oocpos made it especially sympathetic
to the idea of the philosopher-king. This sympathy for
paodeia is especially marked in the Stoics of the first century
A.D. Nature herself, according to Seneca, first conceived the
idea of a king, as we see from the example of bees and other
insects. 1 The Roman emperor must recognize that he holds
the most sacred and most responsible of all positions, he has
been chosen as the viceroy of God on earth. 2 Musonius Rufus
regarded a king as * Law Incarnate, the contriver of good
government and harmony (oftovola), the emulator of God,
and, as He is, the father of his subjects '. 3 So too Dio
Chrysostom 4 described to Trajan the majestic spectacle of
the Peak of Kingship, also called the Peak of God, where
Basileia sits throned, attended by Justice and Good Govern-
ment, Law and Peace. Chrysippus had said that the oocpo<; will
live with kings, and Seneca declares that he above all others
will feel gratitude to the monarch who makes it possible for
him to enjoy leisure, to control his own time, and to live in a
tranquillity uninterrupted by public employments. To such
a man, the emperor will seem a god ... * deus nobis haec
otia fecit '. And Epictetus 5 acknowledges the debt the world
owes to Trajan for the gift of peace, though insisting that peace
of the soul can only be won through philosophy. Against
monarchy as such, Philosophy had no objection to urge ; if
it criticizes, the criticism must be directed against the monarch
himself. For according to the Stoic paradox, the aoyoi; is a
king in his own right, understanding the art of government,
though his kingdom is not of worldly things. As for the
Cynic, he is schoolmaster as well as king, the naidaywyos of
the human race, whose duty is to advise or admonish all who
stand in need of correction, even though it be the Emperor
himself. So the Cynic Isidorus reproached Nero, with the
well-worn Cynic taunt that * he knew well how to sing the
ills of Nauplia, but disposed ill of his own goods '. 6

From Stoic-Cynic doctrine, then, there was no menace to

1 de Clem., i. 19.

2 ' Electus sum, qui in terris deorum vice fungerer.* de Clem.,
i. 2.

8 fr. viii. 8. i. * Or., i. 74, 75. 6 Epict., Ixxiii. 10.

6 Suet., Nero, c. 39.
10

130 A HISTORY OF CYNICISM

monarchy, but authority must always claim to judge a move-
ment by its fruits. There were, at the beginning of Nero's
reign, those who regarded Philosophy as a potential source of
danger : there was some opposition to Seneca's acting as tutor
to Nero, on the grounds that the Stoic system was most
unsuitable for the education of princes. 1 In 64 Seneca found
it necessary to protest against the view that * The faithful
adherents of Philosophy are rebellious and fractious persons,
ever deriding kings and officials and those responsible for the
conduct of public affairs/ 2 The protagonists of this view,
one of whom was Tigellinus, must have felt that their case was
greatly strengthened by the evidence of the Pisonian con-
spiracy. The record of Stoicism, viewed from the official
standpoint in the early months of 66, could only have seemed
a bad one. Rubellius Plautus, a possible rival for the prin-
cipate, first banished to Asia and then executed, had been a
prominent member of the sect ; his teacher, Musonius Rufus,
was exiled shortly after the Pisonian conspiracy, which had
implicated other distinguished adherents of Stoicism in Seneca
and Lucan. Henderson 3 stresses the complete change in
Nero's attitude to the nobility after the Pisonian conspiracy ;
for the previous ten years he had treated them with marked
clemency, now he regarded the nobility with distrust and the
Senate with hatred. Such is the necessary preface to a con-
sideration of Nero's attack on that eminent noble, senator, and
Stoic, Thrasea Paetus.

The attack was, of course, not unexpected. Thrasea had
incurred Nero's displeasure some years earlier, though there
had been an attempt at a reconciliation. It is improbable
that the reconciliation was sincere ; and we have evidence
that for several months before his trial Thrasea had been
living in daily expectation of exile or death. 4 The actual
evidence on which he was condemned is dismissed by
Furneaux 6 as * flimsy ' ; but he rightly insists that no evidence

1 de. Clem., ii. v. 2. 2 Sen. Epist. Mor., 73. 3 op. cit., p. 288 ff.

4 Epictetus [i. i. 26 ff.] tells how he remarked to Musonius Rufus,
* I would rather be put to death to-day than exiled to-morrow.*
Musonius was banished late in 65 or early in 66, the trial of Thrasea
was held in July 66. Coming from Musonius' pupil the story is
trustworthy.

6 Tacitus, Annals, Vol. ii, p. 81.

DEMETRIUS 131

can have been produced of another conspiracy of which
Tacitus says nothing, for the trial was held in the Senate,
and Tacitus presumably derives his information from official
reports. We may be confident, then, that the Tacitean
account represents the substance of the case against Thrasea,
and indeed it is hard to see why some scholars have tried to
look outside it to find the reasons for his condemnation. I
do not, of course, suggest that his accusers, Capito Cossutianus
and Eprius Marcellus, were animated by any concern for
the welfare of the state ; they were Nero's creatures, and
were chiefly concerned to earn the handsome reward they
might expect if a conviction was secured. That being
admitted, it can hardly be denied that they produced a strong
case.

The gist of it is, Thrasea was setting himself up as the * dux
et auctor ' of a system which was opposed to the Imperial
authority : his prestige among his followers was enormous,
and was elsewhere attracting widespread attention : there was
the possibility (hinted at but not directly mentioned by the
prosecution) that the more impetuous of his followers might
attempt to assassinate the Emperor. There the accusers were
content to rest their case, and it is odd that modern scholars
should so often have asked more of them. Their dissatis-
faction, one may suggest, arises from failure to estimate
correctly the Emperor's position, above all, his exposure to
assassination. Boissier, for example, belittles the importance
of Thrasea's opposition on the grounds that his political
activities consisted in doing nothing. 1 But non-participation
and passive resistance are the most effective weapons against
an Imperial system, as a far more liberal Empire than that of
the Caesars has recently experienced. Idealism, no doubt,
would prefer that Thrasea should have headed a party in the
Senate and have worked for a majority with the object of
finally deposing Nero senatus consulto. But such methods
were completely impracticable in the Rome of the Emperors
and there were in any case quicker ways of getting rid of a
rule that depended on the life of a single man. But though
modern historians have doubted the force of the case for the
prosecution, it was fully acknowledged by Thrasea and his
party. For them, the question was not how to effect a defence,
1 op. cit., p. 102.

1-s A HISTORY OF CYNICISM

out simply whether or not Thrasea should appear in the
Senate on the day of the trial. 1 Conviction they regarded as
inevitable, but it was felt that a better moral could be pointed
by absence : and Thrasea's last act of non-participation was to
stay away from his own trial. He was condemned to death,
and it is hard to see how the verdict could have gone other-
wise ; for though in private life he may have been the embodi-
ment of virtue, that was from the official point of view entirely
irrelevant.

His associates, Helvidius Priscus and Paconius Agrip-
pinus, who had ' not as yet dared to emulate the contumacy of
their leader ', were banished from Italy, a relatively mild
punishment. Demetrius, Thrasea's philosophic guide, was
probably banished shortly after the trial ; and about this time
or a little earlier a similar sentence was passed on Cornutus,
the teacher of Lucan no doubt occasioned rather by his
profession of the * intempestiva sapientia ' of the Stoics than
by any too outspoken criticism of Nero's literary abilities.
Barea Soranus, whose trial took place on the same day as that
of Thrasea, is not explicitly named as one of the latter's
' satellites '. But he was a prominent Stoic, and enjoyed the
intimacy of Musonius Rufus ; he was condemned, like
Musonius, on the score of his old associations with Rubellius
Plautus. By the end of Nero's reign the Stoic opposition was
muzzled, for all its most prominent members had either been
put to death or else exiled.

After the death of Nero the exiles appear to have flocked
back. Musonius and Helvidius Priscus were recalled by
Galba ; before the end of 69 Demetrius was probably again
in Rome. During the next few years the opposition had more
scope for political action than had been the case under Nero ;
the disorders of the ' Year of the Four Emperors ' gave the
Senate a political importance it had not enjoyed since the
establishment of the Principate, and of the surviving members
of Thrasea Paetus* coterie, both Arulenus Rusticus and
Helvidius held important offices, being praetors for the years
69 and 70 respectively. 2 Again, Vespasian was at first tolerant,
till the intransigeance of the opposition forced him to severe
measures. Unfortunately, our evidence for the opposition
to Vespasian is scanty. Tacitus stressed the importance of
1 Annals, xvi. 25, 26. 2 Tac., Hist., in, 80; iv, 53.

DEMETRIUS 133

the career of Helvidius Priscus * which won him much glory
and much hatred ', and gives a character sketch as a prelude
to the frequent appearances he is to make ; but the Histories,
as we have them, break off before his opposition to Vespasian
has become acute, and even the account of its early stages
contains a most annoying lacuna at a critical point. The nar-
rative of Dio Cassius is also much abridged ; and Suetonius,
the only authority for the fate of Helvidius, says little of his
policy. The impression of the opposition that can be derived
from these authorities is that it was directed by Helvidius,
who began with two main objects in view, to exact revenge
from the ' delatores ' responsible for the deaths of Thrasea
and Barea Soranus, and to secure a greater share of political
importance for the Senate in general and for himself in
particular. His impetuosity and ambition brought him in-
creasingly into conflict with Vespasian, thus driving him to
an embittered opposition to the monarchy which finally became
so vocal that the reluctant Emperor had to get rid of him. 1

Helvidius' first act in the principate of Galba was an attempt
to bring the arch- informer, Eprius Marcellus, to justice. The
possibility of a trial caused great excitement in the Senate,
some warmly approved of it, others were themselves too
deeply involved to feel easy about the outcome of investiga-
tions into the * delatores '. Moreover, Galba himself was in
insecure occupation of the throne, and could not afford to face
a major split in the Senate. He therefore prevailed on Helvi-
dius to drop the case against Marcellus for a time ; it was in
fact not taken up till some months later, under Vespasian.

When the attack on the delatores was taken up again, as a
preliminary trial of strength it was decided to fly at lesser game
than Eprius Marcellus. 2 The obvious object of attack was the
notorious Egnatius Celer, the betrayer of Barea Soranus. He
was not a senator, nor one of the great ' delatores ', so that his
fall was unlikely to involve any one else, moreover he was
manifestly guilty. The case was clearly one in which the
Emperor could safely let public feeling have its way, and feeling
was overwhelmingly opposed to Celer. The prosecution was
conducted by Musonius Rufus, the defence, surprisingly

1 Our chief authority for what follows is Tacitus. Vide Hist., iv,
c. 5-1 1 ; 40-4; 53.
8 Hist., iv. 10 and 40.

i 3 4 A HISTORY OF CYNICISM

enough, by the Cynic Demetrius. Tacitus says that Demetrius
appeared to be acting ' ambitiosius quam honestius ' in under-
taking the defence. 1 It is hard to see what he means, and one
is tempted to suppose he is indulging his penchant for dis-
covering evil motives behind every action. Celer lacked the
skill or the nerve to defend himself, and however guilty, had a
claim to be represented : it is hard to say what ambition
Demetrius could be serving in thus championing an unpopular
case. The spectacle of Stoic and Cynic appearing in the Roman
courts as prosecutor and counsel for the defence is in itself
remarkable, and appears even more so when we consider the
charge on which Celer was tried. He was, of course, con-
demned, and men read in the enthusiasm which greeted his
downfall a favourable omen for the attack on those greater
personages, the ' delatores ' themselves. A measure was
passed in the Senate which required all members to take an
oath that they were personally innocent of any attack on the
life of a senator during the reign of Nero, and which requested
the Emperor to permit access to the Imperial archives, that the
names of the * delatores ' might be discovered in each case.
The oath was taken with much prevarication and some perjury,
and the feeling against the delatores was becoming intense.
All who had suffered joined the attack ; and there was one
particularly stormy meeting of the Senate. Domitian was
present, and at the climax of a series of attacks Helvidius
fiercely denounced Eprius Marcellus.

So hostile was the temper of the Senate that the chief

* delatores ' found it prudent to withdraw ; in so doing,
Marcellus uttered the ominous remark, * I leave you to your
Senate, Priscus, play the king in the presence of Caesar.'
The day was passed in bitter discord, the majority of the
Senate being for the destruction of the ' informers ', while a

* few strong men ' urged an amnesty. The House rose with
nothing decided, but the prospects for the overthrow of the
informers were never so bright. At the next meeting came
the reversal, with a display of the Emperor's power which was
all the more impressive from the moderation of its tone.
Before any one else was called on to give an opinion, Domitian
spoke in favour of an amnesty ; he was followed by Mucianus,

1 Possibly * acting more from desire for notoriety than desire for
good repute '.

DEMETRIUS 135

who spoke to the same effect, in particular suggesting the
abandonment of the case against the delatores. Mucianus'
speech was couched in mild language, amounting almost to a
plea, but it was obviously * inspired '. Once the Emperor's
wishes were known, the obedient Senate performed a complete
volte-face, and the matter was dropped. It was a crushing
blow for the policy of Helvidius Priscus, and it may well be that
the headstrong bitterness of his later opposition to Vespasian
was largely occasioned by the disappointment of that day.

At every point the Senate had failed Helvidius' hopes, but
he did all that a single individual could to lessen the Emperor's
prestige. As praetor he omitted the Emperor's titles on his
edicts, on his return to Rome he greeted him merely by the
name ' Vespasian ', ' such was his disrespect for the Emperor
on all occasions that he seemed to be almost depriving him of
his status ' (' cogere eum in ordinem ').* As has been said,
our evidence for Helvidius' actions at this period is scanty,
we merely know that his opposition was daring and bitter,
and that Vespasian showed remarkable tolerance. We hear of
a scene in the Senate, when Helvidius opposed Vespasian,
who left the House in tears with the remark, * Either my son
shall succeed me, or no one at all.' 2

Rostovtseff makes the attractive suggestion that the point
at issue was the succession to the throne, and that Helvidius
had objected to the nomination of Titus as heir, and wished
the next emperor to be chosen as the * best man ', in the Stoic-
Cynic sense. 3 Opposition to the principle of hereditary
monarchy may well have been a feature of Stoic-Cynic propa-
ganda, and as RostovtsefF points out, Philosophy made a truce
with the monarchy when the principle of adoption was
observed, as it was from Nerva to Marcus Aurelius. But it
seems hardly possible to doubt that Helvidius was a genuine
Republican ; his book in praise of Cato, his refusal to ac-
knowledge the Emperor's titles on his edicts, his behaviour
* ut libera semper civitate usus ', all point in that direction.
More significant still are the reasons Dio Cassius gives for his
final suppression.

1 Suet., Vesp. y c. 15. 2 id., ib., c. 25 ; Dio. Cass., Ixv. 12. i.

3 Social and Economic Hist, of the Roman Empire, p. 519, p. 14.
Elsewhere he appears to think that the remark referred to a coi}-
spiracy.

136 A HISTORY OF CYNICISM

Vespasian hated Helvidius, not on account of his abuse of himself
and his friends, but because he was a turbulent fellow who culti-
vated the mob and was for ever praising democracy and denouncing
the monarchy. He banded men together as though it were the
function of philosophy to overthrow the established order, insult
those in power, and bring about a revolution. 1

Helvidius was first punished by ' relegatio in insulam ', then
by death, though at the last moment the Emperor tried to
cancel the order of his execution.

The banishment of Helvidius and the expulsion of Stoic
and Cynic philosophers from Rome presumably took place
about the same time, i.e. between 71 and 75, and more probably
in the early part of that period rather than the later. The
expulsion was ordered at the instigation of Mucianus, and the
reasons for it are stated in more general terms that those which
led to the suppression of Helvidius.

Inasmuch as many philosophers actuated by Stoic principles,
especially Demetrius the Cynic, were taking advantage of the name
of philosophy to preach publicly many doctrines inappropriate to
the age, and had thus subtly corrupted certain persons, Mucianus
. . . denounced them at length and persuaded Vespasian to expel
all such persons from the city.

The nature of these inappropriate doctrines is not stated, but
it is tempting to believe with Rostovtseff that what the Cynics
and Stoics were opposing was the principle of hereditary
succession to the principate : such doctrines were certainly
inappropriate so soon after Titus' nomination as * Imperator
designatus '. It is clear, too, that in their propaganda they
vigorously assailed the Emperor personally, and his favourite
Mucianus ; Mucianus had not the Emperor's tolerance of
* yapping dogs ', and his resentment shows through his denunci-
ation of the Stoics.

They are full of empty boasting, and if one of them grows a long
beard and elevates his eyebrows, and throws his TQifiwvtov over his
shoulder and goes barefooted he claims straightway wisdom and
courage and righteousness, and gives himself great airs, though he
may not know his letters nor, as the saying goes, how to swim.
They despise every one, and call the man of good family effeminate,

1 D.C., 65. 12.

DEMETRIUS 137

the low-born poor-spirited, the handsome man a debauchee, the
ugly person simple-minded, the rich covetous, and the poor greedy. 1

The passage is interesting as showing how at this period Stoic
and Cynic philosophers were practically indistinguishable,
alike in their rationale and their propaganda. Demetrius and
Hostilianus were the most prominent undesirables, and were
treated with the harsher sentence of ' relegatio in insulam ', 2
the others being merely expelled from the city of Rome.
Hostilianus withdrew, but Demetrius remained obstinate,
continuing his abuse and propaganda. Vespasian wisely
refused to honour him with martyrdom, and ultimately he was
compelled to accept his sentence ; so far as we know, he never
again returned to Rome. The expulsion of Stoics and Cynics
was complete, but for one exception Musonius Rufus, who
appears to have been exempted by name from the decree. It
is probable that the prestige he had gained from his successful
prosecution of Celer made it unwise to take immediate action
against him ; that his doctrines were not more acceptable than
those of the rest of the sect is suggested by the statement that
he was banished shortly after the decree of general expulsion. 3

But by A.D. 75 some of the Cynics had got back again into
Rome, and were fanning the popular opposition to the marriage
of Titus and Berenice. One Diogenes entered the theatre
when it was full, and denounced them in a long abusive speech.
He got off with a flogging, but another member of the sect,
called Heras, who, expecting no harsher treatment, * gave vent to
many abusive remarks ', was beheaded. 4 Rostovtseff suggests
that the punishment of Heras is evidence that he directly
attacked the Emperor himself.

The next occasion on which philosophy came into conflict
with the Imperial authority was during the reign of Domitian.
It is clear that there were two separate ' expulsions of philos-
ophers ', 5 and it is reasonable to suppose that the first of these

iD.C., 65. 13. 2 id., ib. 13.

8 Vide Hense, Musonii reliquiae, p. xxxv. 4 D.C., 65. 15.

5 Furneaux (Tac., Agric., note on c. 2) says that Eusebius is an
only authority for the earlier exile. But Dio Cassius (67. 13. 2)
speaks of * the philosophers being again driven out ', i.e. the general
expulsion which followed the prosecution of Rusticus and Herennius
Senecio, clearly implying that measures had previously been taken
against them.

138 A HISTORY OF CYNICISM

was in 89, and in some way connected with the conspiracy of
Antonius Saturninus. This conspiracy was for Domitian
what the Pisonian conspiracy was for Nero ; henceforward he
was suspicious of the nobility, and hag-ridden by a perpetual
and well-founded dread of assassination. The suppression of
the conspiracy was followed by the execution of many Roman
nobles. These executions were carried out in a secrecy which
made them even more formidable; we know few names of
victims, but it is likely that many of those mentioned by
Suetonius as executed for trivial reasons were really implicated
in the conspiracy of Saturninus. The measures taken against
the philosophers are not clear. It is probable that their
expulsion came about through connexion with the discontented
and rebellious members of the aristocracy, as had been the
case under Vespasian. But the decree of expulsion can hardly
have been a general one, or if so it was not rigidly enforced,
for in five years' time we find the philosophers back in the
city again ; while it does not seem likely that any action was
taken against the philosopher Artemidorus till the second
expulsion.

The more severe storm broke in 94 x to suppress an opposi-
tion that was clearly becoming more vocal. The features of
Domitian 's rule which caused the aristocracy to hate him
more than any previous emperor are well known his abolition
of the principle of dyarchy, and the consequent disappearance
of the last vestiges of senatorial authority, his insistence on the
cult of his personal divinity, all combined to transform the
Roman Empire into an Oriental tyranny. All men were not
content with preserving that * fifteen-year-long silence ' which
Tacitus says lay so heavily on his generation. The opposition
came from the quarter in which one would naturally look for
it : the survivors and descendants of those who had opposed
Nero. Helvidius Priscus, son of the victim of Vespasian,
produced an Atellane farce which apparently could be con-
strued as a satire on the intrigue between the Empress Domitilla
and the actor Paris ; the fact that the satire came from one of
that name no doubt weighed heavily against him, and he was

1 I follow the chronology of Otto (Sitz. der. Bayer. Akad., 1919,
10, p. 43 if.), who places the decree against the philosophers in the
last months of 94, a position he defends (id., 1923, i., p. 4 ff.) against
the attack of Baehrens (Hermes, 58 (1923), p. 109 ff.).

DEMETRIUS 139

put to death. Shortly after his death appeared the two famous
eulogies on the great Stoic martyrs, that on Thrasea Paetus
by Arulenus Rusticus, who as a rash young tribune had pro-
posed to interpose his veto on Thrasea's trial ; that on Helvidius
Priscus by Herennius Senecio, from materials supplied by
Helvidius' wife, Fannia. The publication of these books
evidently attracted much notice, and inflamed the hostility
already felt towards Domitian ; accordingly the informers were
unleashed, and in the issue the authors were put to death, and
their books publicly and ignominiously burned.

In connexion with this affair came the decree of the Senate
which expelled from the city all philosophers, ' mathematici ',
and * astrologi. 5 The philosophers were implicated, as they had
been in the time of Vespasian by their connexions with the
disaffected Roman aristocrats ; Artemidorus, one of the most
prominent Stoics of the day, was the son-in-law of Musonius
Rufus, and Epictetus had been Musonius' pupil. 1 The mathe-
matici and astrologi were expelled because their revelations of
the future served to encourage conspiracies against the
Emperor's life. In some cases the role of * philosopher ' and
astrologer might be combined, as is clear from the story of
Apollonius of Tyana. ' During the reign of Domitian ', says
Philostratus, * some philosophers fled for refuge to the Western
Celts, others hid themselves in Scythia or Libya.' 2 This can
hardly be taken as evidence for the results of the expulsion of
94 ; the only philosopher known to have visited Scythia
is Dio Chrysostom, who had been banished from Bithynia
twelve years earlier, and who only took up philosophy after his
banishment. One suspects that the Western Celts and Libya

1 It is highly probable that Epictetus withdrew to Nicopolis in 94,
and that those who, with Robert (in P.W., sub Epictetus), regard
89 as the occasion of his retirement from Rome are wrong. For
(i) Aulus Gellius (cv. n) definitely says that he retired as a conse-
quence of the senatorial decree banishing philosophers ; (2) Pliny
(Ep. y iii., xi. i) connects the expulsion of philosophers with the
prosecution of Herennius Senecio and Arulenus Rusticus, as does
Tacitus (Agr., c. 2).

2 Phil., vii. 4. Throughout this section Philostratus' purpose is
to contrast the cowardly action of other philosophers with that of his
hero Apollonius. They fled for refuge to the ends of the earth,
Apollonius (not a little fortified, it may be suggested, by his useful
gift of being able to disappear at will) remained to confront Domitian.

i 4 o A HISTORY OF CYNICISM

are introduced as rhetorical antitheses to Scythia ; and the
statement of Pliny that he visited Artemidorus in a suburban
villa near Rome shows that the clause of the decree which
banned the philosophers from Italy was not immediately
enforced. But Artemidorus seems to have been kept under
some kind of surveillance, and it was dangerous for any one
in authority to visit him. The teaching of Epictetus in
Nicopolis, on the other hand, seems to have been in no way
restricted. The statement of Dio Cassius that * many persons
were put to death on this same charge of philosophizing '
refers (if to any one, for no names are given) to Roman aristo-
crats ; the only case we know in which a non- aristocrat was
executed for this or similar reasons is that of the * sophist '
Maternus, who was * put to death for abusing tyranny in a
practice speech '.*

Within two years after the expulsion of the philosophers
Domitian was dead, and the ' period of tribulation for the
human race ' was over. Under the mild and benignant rule
of Nerva ' monarchy and liberty, previously irreconcilable,
were joined together '. * Libertas publica ', * Roma renas-
cens ', were more than legends on the coinage, they were true
reflections of the spirit of the times. ' If Cato were alive
to-day, he would be a monarchist ', is a statement which by
itself can hardly carry much weight, coming as it does from
one who was guilty of the grossest flattery under Domitian.
But the chorus of approval is universal, the Panegyricus of
Pliny and the speeches TZEQI fiaoiheiac; of Dio Chrysostom
show how the nobles and the philosophers, the two disaffected
classes in the time of Domitian, are enthusiastic in support of
the New Model monarchy of Trajan. Philosophy, indeed, as
we have already seen, had never opposed monarchy, but only
individual monarchs, and Dio Chrysostom, describing the
Stoic-Cynic ideal of ftaadela, suggests that it finds an embodi-
ment in Trajan. 2

Pliny had been the friend of the Stoic aristocrats who

1 D.C., 67. 12. Was Maternus a rhetorician of the * Second
Sophistic ' or a philosopher ? Dion Cassius speaks of the Cynics
who crept back into Rome after the expulsion in the reign of Vespasian
as acxpiaral, but the account of the * practice speech ' suggests that
Maternus was really a rhetorician.

2 Dio Chrys., i. 55.

DEMETRIUS 141

perished under Domitian, but he was probably not so much
attracted by the ideal of Cato as repelled by the actions of
Domitian. He and his kind were not Republicans, they knew
a good emperor when they saw one, and were prepared to
support him. The small and closely related group of irrecon-
cilables which had successively opposed Nero, Vespasian and
Domitian had been almost extinguished. Writing in A.D. 107,
when Fannia, widow of the elder Helvidius Priscus, lay dying,
Pliny laments that, ' though she leaves descendants, yet at her
death an ancient house will seem to be extinct \ ! This appears
to imply that the descendants were mere children, and in any
case none of them adopted the role of opposition to the Emperor
which was almost hereditary in their house. The only
descendant we know of the Stoics of Domitian's reign is that
Junius Rusticus who was consul suffectus in 133, city-prefect
in the reign of Antoninus, and the teacher of Marcus Aurelius.
Fannia, that indomitable old lady, must have been the last of
the Republicans. Henceforward, as Rostovtseff says, there
was an alliance between the educated classes and the monarchy
an alliance whose undisturbed harmony led to the Golden
Age of the Antonines. Philosophy and especially Stoicism
enjoyed the imperial favour ; and although Cynicism, its
companion in adversity, did not follow it to court in the second
century, there is no sign of any general opposition of the Cynics
to the monarchy. 2 Under Antoninus the principle was laid
down that * no one in the garb of a philosopher was ever to be
punished '. Finally, with Marcus Aurelius the old dream of
the philosopher king was at last realized.

NOTE TO CHAPTER VII

Authorities. For the character and teaching of Demetrius the best
authority is Seneca. His references to Demetrius may fairly be
regarded as trustworthy ; he esteemed the philosopher highly, and

1 Pliny, epist. vii.

2 Dio Chrysostom says that in the time of Trajan the Cynics in
Alexandria were to blame for outbreaks of rioting ; while Peregrinus
inveighed against Antoninus in Rome, and was apparently concerned
in an abortive rising in Achaea, as we shall see. But Alexandria
always had politics of its own, which necessitated its being treated
as a special case. Peregrinus, too, was not a person from whose
actions it is safe to generalize.

H2 A HISTORY OF CYNICISM

was apparently very intimate with him throughout the years A.D.
51-65. Tacitus mentions Demetrius* connexion with Thrasea
Paetus and the * philosophic opposition ' ; his activities under
Vespasian, and his banishment, are referred to by Suetonius and Dio
Cassius. There are also several references to him in Philostratus*
Life of Apollonius of Tyana, but, as will be contended, these are of
doubtful value.

CHAPTER VIII
CYNICISM IN THE SECOND CENTURY A.D.

(a) General Character

The period between the death of Vespasian and that of
Marcus Aurelius saw Cynicism numerically far stronger than
it had ever been before. The fact is reflected in the literature
of the period, for references to the Cynics appear in almost
every author from Martial to Lucian and nearly always they
are uncomplimentary. By the early years of the second century
the Cynics were numerous at Rome, and even more so in
Alexandria ; a great crowd of them from all parts of the Greek-
speaking world assembled for the ' apotheosis ' of Peregrinus
at the Olympic games of 167 ; a few years later the humbler
classes of artisan were turning Cynic in such numbers that
Lucian professes alarm at the prospect of work being brought
to a standstill. But, though Cynicism increased its numbers,
there is no evidence that it widened its range ; as in the earlier
period, the wanderings of the Cynics seem to have been
confined to the Eastern portion of the Graeco-Roman world,
apart from their appearance in Rome itself. To judge from
his name, Crescens may have been a Roman, but otherwise all
the Cynics known were of Greek extraction, and probably few
of them could speak Latin. The Western half of the Empire
was in any case an unpromising field for the Cynic, its inhabi-
tants had little use for philosophers, and the climate was unsuit-
able for the vagrant, begging life. But we hear of Cynics in
all parts of the Eastern provinces they were numerous in
Asia and Syria, Athens and Corinth appear to have been their
favourite places in Greece : they were familiar in Epirus and
Thrace ; even in the remoter parts of Pontus and Moesia the
inhabitants knew that a man in a beggar's dress might be a
* philosopher '. But most of their * teaching ' seems to have
been done in the larger towns the psychological background
of Cynicism is that of a reaction against an overdeveloped urban
civilization and probably they were seen in the country only
on their wanderings from city to city.

143

144 A HISTORY OF CYNICISM

Yet of all these adherents of Cynicism we know only the
names of some dozen men who were certainly historical figures,
and for only four of those Dio Chrysostom, Demonax,
Oenomaus of Gadara, and Peregrinus is the evidence suffi-
ciently detailed to enable any real estimate to be made.
There is evidence of a certain amount of Cynic literary
activity during this period, though very little of it has
survived. Several of Dio Chrysostom's orations were delivered
while he was leading the KVVIKQC, fiio<; ; Oenomaus of Gadara
was a prolific writer after the model of the older Cynics of the
time of Diogenes ; Peregrinus Proteus sent ' letters, testaments
and codes to all the chief cities ' to be delivered after his
immolation ; some of the * Cynic epistles ', particularly those
which go under the name of Crates, may be as late as the
second century. But on the whole literary production was
not characteristic of the Cynics of this period ; some few,
such as Demonax, were perhaps averse to it because they felt
obliged to concentrate all their activities on the practical side
of their teaching, while many others were more or less illiterate.
It seems likely that few men of striking personality were to be
found amongst them ; the more earnest members of the sect
probably conformed more or less to the stock-figure represented
by the impersonal * Cynicus ' of the pseudo-Lucianic dialogue
of that name. It is obvious, too, that as in the Hellenistic
period, the KWIKOS {tto$ did not involve adherence to an
organized system of doctrine. Demonax and Oenomaus were
thorough-going sceptics in all religious matters ; the Cynicism
of Peregrinus and his numerous followers was tinged with
mysticism, and finally evolved a cult of its own ; Peregrinus
was for a time a member of the Christian community while
leading the Cynic life ; Crescens was an opponent of the
Christians, and responsible for the martyrdom of Justin.

A feature of the growth of Cynicism during this period was
the influx into the movement of a large number of charlatans.
The most vivid picture of this aspect of contemporary Cynicism
is that given in the Fugitivi of Lucian ; the work was written
shortly after the death of Peregrinus, when Lucian was especi-
ally hostile, and one would be inclined to suspect his account
were it not that ample confirmation is to be found elsewhere.
Juvenal, Martial, and Aelius Aristides speak in the same way
of the Cynics ; more important still is the fact that Dio

CYNICISM IN THE SECOND CENTURY A.D, 145

Chrysostom, who had himself lived the xwixde (Mos, inveighs
against ' those who bring the name of philosophy into dis-
grace ', while Epictetus, for whom the ideal Cynic was the
highest type of philosopher, speaks with contempt of con-
temporary representatives of the profession. The Fugitivi
may therefore be accepted as evidence for one side of second-
century Cynicism. The dialogue opens on Olympus, where
Zeus and Apollo are discussing the suicide of Peregrinus
Proteus. They are interrupted by the entrance of Philosophy,
weeping, and complaining of her treatment on earth. She
has been outraged, she complains, not by the vulgar mob, as
in the days of Socrates, nor by the philosophers themselves,
but by a race of half-breeds

whose dress and look and equipment is like my own, and who claim
to be enrolled under my command, and give themselves out as the
pupils and comrades and devotees of Philosophy. But their life
is an abomination, full of ignorance and boldness and depravity,
and of great insolence towards myself. 1

She then narrates the story of her career on earth in discharging
the task Zeus laid on her as the * healer of mankind ' (cf . the
Cynic conception of the largos). Beginning with the bar-
barians, she had forced the Indians to come down off their
elephants and turn to philosophy : then came the sages of
Chaldaea, Babylon and Egypt. Then she turned her atten-
tion to the Greeks, was the friend of the Ionian scientists, the
foe of the Sophists, and at the death of Socrates was minded
to leave the Earth altogether, but was persuaded to stay by
the older Cynics, Antisthenes, Diogenes, Crates and Menippus.
These reminiscences are interrupted by Zeus, who demands
to be told of her present aggressors. They are, she says, a
low type of humanity, mostly slaves and hirelings, whose lack
of leisure deprived them of any acquaintance with Philosophy
in their youth, her very name they had never heard. But
when they grew up and saw the respect in which philosophers
were held, and the licence of speech allowed them, and the
influence they possessed, they considered Philosophy to be a
4 potent despotism '. They had no means of learning the

1 Cf. the remark of Dio Chrysostom in the first Tarsian oration,
that there is nothing in their appearance to distinguish the Cynic
charlatan from the true philosopher.
II

146 A HISTORY OF CYNICISM

necessary and true attributes of the profession ; but on the
other hand their trades were shabby and laborious, and offered
a bare livelihood, and many found slavery insupportable. So
summoning up boldness and ignorance and shamelessness,
and practising new forms of abusiveness, they assumed the
garb of a philosopher, and, like Aesop's donkey, thought they
were the lion when they had put on its skin and brayed. . . .

The whole city is full of this roguery, especially of such as call
themselves followers of Diogenes, Antisthenes and Crates, and
enroll themselves under the sign of the Dog ... the canine
qualities they possess are barking, lasciviousness, theft, sexual
licence, flattery, fawning on any one who will feed them. . . . We
shall soon see wholesale desertion from the factories, when the
workers realize how they have to toil and labour from morning till
night, and wear themselves out to earn a pittance for their drudgery,
while these quacks and charlatans live a life of plenty, demanding
like lords and readily getting what they ask. . . . This is what
they call the life of the Golden Age * when honey drops from heaven
into their mouths. . . . Many of them seduce the wives of their
hosts and lead them off to be philosophers too, quoting Plato's
dictum that women should be held in common 2 . . . their be-
haviour at banquets, and their drunkenness would be a long story
to narrate. 3 And this they do while reproving drunkenness,
adultery, lechery and greed. No two things are more utterly
opposed than their precepts and their practices. . . . And then,
the greed of their mendicancy ! Some even make a fortune out
of it, and then, good-bye to the wallet, cloak and tub ! . . . So
the average man holds Philosophy in contempt, and thinks all its
adherents are like the Cynics.

Moved by the plight of Philosophy, Zeus decides to take
measures against this plague. To the great patron saint of
the Cynics, Heracles himself, is assigned the task of rooting
out the pest, a duty which he says will be even more unpleasant
than cleansing the Augean stables. By way of a beginning,
Heracles, Hermes and Philosophy go down to Thrace, to
Philippopolis, where notable charlatans are to be found, three
runaway slaves, accompanied by a woman. (The fact that a

1 Cf. Maximus of Tyre, Diss. 36. The Cynic life is the life of the
Golden Age.

2 In Athenaeus, Cynic women are mentioned. One of them,
Nicion, nicknamed * Dog-fly ', was presumably a courtesan.

8 Cf. what is said of Cynics at banquets by Lucian in the Lapithae,
and by Athenaeus.

CYNICISM IN THE SECOND CENTURY A.D. 147

definite locality is named, and some details given of the career
of the leader of this little group, one Cantharus, suggests that
Lucian is referring to real persons.) Through the agency of
the gods these runaways are handed back to their masters,
having first been exposed as arrant quacks.

Cantharus and his friends are, I think, to be taken as typical
of many of the new converts to Cynicism. It is easy to under-
stand how the * free life ' of the Cynic could attract those
engaged in the generally oppressive and monotonous tasks of
an artisan in the ancient world. To a slave the attraction would
be still greater, and the rapid spread of Christianity, and such
of the mystery religions as were open to them, amongst the
slaves, shows how eager they were to embrace any creed which
would lighten the monotony of their lot. Nor must one forget,
amongst the possible converts to Cynicism, those people,
numerous in any civilization, who are characterized by what
has lately been called the * escape-psychology ' the desire to
emancipate themselves from all the restraints imposed by an
ordered society. It was this temperament, allied with religious
mysticism, that later produced the curious extravagances of
the anchorites of the Thebaid. That the KWIKQC. (Mot; in
itself offered exceptional scope to the debauchee is improbable.
The general standard of morals in the Empire placed no undue
restraint on the sensual appetites, and there was no need to
have recourse to the Cynic avaidsia for indulgence. The
accusations of immorality against the Cynics are animated by
disgust not so much at the practices themselves as for the
hypocrisy of those who indulge in them. But, all in all, it is
easy to see that, for those in humble circumstances, there was
some inducement to turn Cynic. It offered freedom from
restraint, change of scene, wide tolerance of behaviour, and a
living (of a sort) without work. And one must remember that
however ascetic the traditional Cynic diet seems to us, it was
probably little plainer than the normal fare of the lower classes.
Moreover, the slave or artisan turned Cynic would meet with
the respect of his equals, however much he might be despised
by the cultured. For Lucian is right in saying that the illiterate
Cynics of his day were taking advantage of the high respect gen-
erally accorded to philosophy ; in this sense one may admit the
description of Cynicism as the ' philosophy of the proletariat '.

From this general description of Cynicism during the period

148 A HISTORY OF CYNICISM

I pass on to consider those individual Cynics of whom any
record survives, especially Dio Chrysostom, Demonax,
Oenomaus of Gadara, and Peregrinus.

(6) Dio Chrysostom

Alike to the student of the Roman Empire and of classical
literature, the most attractive of these names is that of Dio
Chrysostom. Here he is of interest as the most illustrious
example of a man who lived the Cynic life * under pressure of
circumstance ' (xaia neQiaraow), a course which had been
approved by the Stoics as proper for the aocp6$ and as one in
which he would persevere unless circumstances again inter-
vened and forced him to renounce it. Such a change of
fortune did occur for Dio, and he abandoned the vagrant
Cynic life to become the friend of Trajan, a person of great
influence in the affairs of his native province in Bithynia, and
a kind of unofficial but influential intermediary between the
Roman government and the Greek states generally. Weber's
description of Dio as ' cynicorum sectator ' 1 is thus very
inadequate, and indeed Dio drew on Stoic quite as much as
on Cynic ideas, and was also influenced by Plato and even
Aristotle. Since Weber's time, however, the researches of
von Arnim 2 into the chronology of his writings enable us to
gauge with some accuracy the limits of the influence exercised
upon him by Cynicism. We are here concerned with Dio as
seen from within these limits, and as affording evidence for the
nature of Cynicism in his day. For a full-length biography
the reader must be referred to von Arnim, and to Dill 3 for a
short but brilliant account of his work as a * philosophic
missionary '.

Dio's birth and upbringing alike prepared him for a career
very different from that which circumstances actually forced
him to follow. He came from one of the wealthiest families
in Prusa : and after his father's death his own sumptuous style
of living, more particularly untimely expenditure on building
at a period of famine, drew down on him the hatred and envy
of his poorer fellow-citizens. He received a rhetorical training,
and won considerable fame as a Sophist ; and his speech

1 * De Dione Chrysostomo Cynicorum sectatore. 1

2 Leben itnd Werke des Dion von Prusa, 1898.

8 Social Life at Rome from Nero to Marcus Aurclius, p. 367 ff.

CYNICISM IN THE SECOND CENTURY A.D. 149

ra>v (piXoo6<pa>v shows that he shared the hostility felt by
the Second Sophistic towards the philosophers. His standing
in his native city and his reputation as a Sophist brought him
excellent connexions at Rome, he enjoyed the acquaintance
of Titus, and was intimate with his stepson Flavius Sabinus. 1
He was an ardent Hellenist, and the Rhodian oration, delivered
shortly before his exile, ^shows him looking forward to a cultural
revival which should make the Hellenic cities the moral and
spiritual leaders of the Roman world. His brilliant prospects
were suddenly and completely destroyed by the execution of
Flavius Sabinus, who was suspected of conspiracy against
Domitian, in A.D. 82. His downfall involved Dio, ' as a friend
and a counsellor (yihov dvra Hal av^ovXov). For this is a
habit of tyrants, and even as the Scythians bury with their kings
their cupbearers and cooks and concubines, so do tyrants add
many other innocent persons to the list of their victims/ 2 Dio
was sentenced to exile, a sentence which Emperius shows as
meaning banishment from (i) Rome and Italy, (2) his native
province of Bithynia. 3 The sentence was an imperial decree,
not a senatus consultum, like the expulsion of philosophers in
94, nor a judicial sentence, arising out of a prosecution. Its
term was intended to be ' in perpetuum ', as may be deduced
from the fact that ' it was not lifted till after Domitian 's death,
when Nerva refused to endorse the " acta " of his predecessor '.
Severe though the sentence was, it did not force Dio to the
vagrant life which he chose to lead. Though he no longer
derived any support from his property in Prusa and was appar-
ently without means, several cities made him an offer of citizen
rights, 4 and he could have made a living as a sophist in any
part of the Roman Empire other than Rome, Italy or Bithynia.
Von Arnim suggests that his amour-propre as a famous sophist
was outraged by the Emperor's action, at once unjust and
contemptuous, and that he determined to revenge himself by
carrying on a literary campaign against Domitian. Such a
course would draw down the Emperor's anger on any com-
munity which harboured him, and Dio would naturally hesitate
before establishing himself in any city when he knew that he

1 von Arnim (op. cit.) makes a convincing case for Flavius Sabinus
as ' the person of the highest connexions ' whose fall Dio describes
as responsible for his own exile.

2 Or. 13. i. 3 Emperius, Dio von Prusa, 1844. 4 Or. 44. 6.

150 A HISTORY OF CYNICISM

was a potentially dangerous guest. These considerations,
however, are not mentioned in Dio's own account ; he leaves
us rather to infer that he adopted the vagrant life on the advice
of the Delphic god. ' Following the ancestral custom of the
Greeks,' he says, * I went to Delphi, and asked the god whether
exile was a good thing or a bad/ l He must further have
asked for advice on his particular case, for the reply was, ' Do
the near-by thing with all earnestness, as though it were of
the highest importance, till you come to the ends of the earth.'
The advice, and the fact that it was followed, suggest that
the question came from a man whose world had crashed about
his ears. Dio was cut off from his family and his home,
apparently for ever, his dream of leading a revival of Hellenic
culture had to be abandoned, and he was no longer interested
in the career of a sophist. The only advice which could help
a man in his situation was that which the oracle gave ;
Oenomaus, in his demonstration of the futility of all oracles,
wisely says nothing about the response given to Dio.

During the next fourteen years Dio wandered through the
north-eastern portion of the Roman Empire, and we hear of
him in Greece, in Pontus, in Asia, and in Moesia. He sup-
ported himself from the humblest occupations, and was at
different times a gardener, a bath-attendant, an agricultural
labourer, and, frequently, a beggar. 2 Naturally he was brought
into contact with the lowliest people, and he, who, as he tells
us, * had sat at table with kings and satraps ', 3 learned that
greater hospitality and kindness were to be found in the homes
of the poor. His life during these years damaged his health, 4
but it brought him a deeper insight into the lives of the poor
than can be found in any classical author since Hesiod,
Furthermore, as with Diogenes, it was through his exile that
he was brought to philosophy. He calls himself ' a self-made
philosopher ' (avrovqyoc; rrjq cro^tag), 5 and describes the process
in a passage which is interesting in itself and as evidence for con-
temporary views of the Cynics. 6 As he wandered from place
to place, clad in rough clothes, he says that,

the people who met me judged from my appearance that I was a
vagrant or a beggar, while some took me for a philosopher. So it

1 Or. 13. 9. 2 von Arnim, op. cit., p. 238 ff. 8 Or. 7. 65.
4 ib., 19 ; 40. 2. 5 ib., i. 9. 6 ib., 13. i ff.

CYNICISM IN THE SECOND CENTURY A.D. 151

happened that by degrees, without any deliberate intention on my
part for I did not rate myself so highly that I came to bear the
name of philosopher. Now most of the so-called philosophers
announce themselves, like the heralds at the Olympic games. But
in my case it was a name given by others, and I could not for ever
be contradicting them. And indeed I came to reap a benefit from
the appellation. For many would come and ask me what were my
opinions of Good and Evil, so that I was forced to meditate on
these topics to be able to answer those who questioned me. Again,
they would bid me stand forward and make a speech. . . . When
I reflected ... it seemed to me that all were, so to speak, devoid
of wit, and that none knew what to do nor where to look to find
release from the evils that beset him and from his own gross ignor-
ance . . . that all were led astray in the same manner and nearly
always by the same distractions money, reputation, and bodily
pleasures, and that none knew how to escape them and free his
soul. ... So I blamed them all, and especially myself. . . .

It was therefore as a Cynic that Dio was asked for advice,
and it was as a Cynic that he replied, when he felt justified in
so doing. The most important ethical discourses belonging to
these years are Orations 6, 8, 9 and 10, in each of which
Diogenes is the central figure. 1 The orations are all marked
by what von Arnim rightly calls a * radical Cynicism ', with
emphasis on the familiar slogans of dvaldsia (Shamelessness),
avraQKeta (Self-Sufficiency), andao^cr^ (Training). A series
of shorter speeches, or diake&is which von Arnim assigns to
this period, deal with such subjects as yOovot; (Envy), evdai^ovia
(Happiness), doa (Reputation), &c., and show Dio in the
capacity of the iarqoq (Doctor) healing the diseases of the
human soul. His eagerness to fulfil another of the Cynic's
functions that of the emaxonos (Scout) leads him towards
the end of his exile into a most interesting venture. The
period was one of arduous fighting on the Danube frontier
against the warlike Dacians or Getae, who had just inflicted a
defeat on the Romans and were causing much anxiety. 2 Dio
was eager to * see the state of affairs in the country ' and
journeyed thither, no doubt with the same curiosity that again
led him to the Danube in Trajan's reign, ' to see one side
struggling for power and empire, and the other for their
country and freedom \ The result of his stay in what later

1 See Note i to Chap. VIII. a von Arnim, op, cit., p. 302 ff.

152 A HISTORY OF CYNICISM

became the Roman province of Dacia was A History of the
Getae (ra Finna), which unfortunately has not survived. Von
Arnim makes the attractive and highly probable suggestion
that he saw in the barbarous Getae men nearer to ' the life
according to Nature ' than the over-civilized inhabitants of
the Roman Empire, and that in their great leader Decebalus he
found exemplified the Stoic-Cynic conception of the paadevs
as * the shepherd of the people '.

According to Dio his activities during these years were
characterized by an outspoken invective against Domitian.

I had for my enemy no common person . . . but the so-called
Lord and Master . . . whom I never flattered, nor attempted to
deprecate his hostility, but I was quite openly incensed against him.
The evils that confronted me I am not now going to write and speak
about, for I have already written and spoken of them, and my
speeches were delivered everywhere, and my books widely circulated.

At first sight these claims hardly seem to be borne out in the
extant speeches, where, apart from the remarkable prophecy
of Domitian's murder in Or. 66, the references to the Emperor
seem veiled and indirect. Von Arnim, indeed, pointing out
that Dio makes a clear distinction between his speeches and
his writings, suggests that the denunciations on which the
claim is chiefly based, have not survived. Though possible
this is not likely, for Dio prided himself on his conduct in
opposing Domitian, and would probably have taken care, at
least after his exile, to publish his most notable piece of invec-
tive. Two considerations may be urged to show that the
extant writings do substantiate his claim that he showed a
laudable degree of independence. In the first place one must
remember the retrospective traditions of the literature of the
age. The precept del aq%diov nvo<; nqdy^arot; was so firmly
established that on one occasion Dio apologizes for talking
about Nero and the moderns rather than Cyrus or Alcibiades ; l
the accepted practice was to represent contemporary persons
or events by examples chosen from history. Dio's audience
would therefore be much readier than a modern reader to see
that Heracles and Eurystheus, or Diogenes and Alexander,
stand for Dio and Domitian. Secondly, there is the fate of
Maternus 2 to remind us that denunciation of tyrants, even if

1 Or. 21. 10. 2 See above, p. 140.

CYNICISM IN THE SECOND CENTURY A.D. 153

couched in general terms, could towards the end of Domitian 's
reign be perilous to the speaker. Admittedly Maternus
delivered his speech at Rome, while Dio was in remote and
often semi- barbarous parts of the Empire, but none the less
Dio was a marked man through his connexion with Flavius
Sabinus. At least it must be said for Dio that if his con-
duct during the reign of Domitian be compared with that of
such upholders of the ancient Roman virtues as Tacitus and
Juvenal, it is not the Greek who has the worst of the com-
parison.

It is evident that towards the end of his exile Dio had acquired
a considerable reputation as a philosopher. He himself says
that his writings were widely circulated, and we know what
enthusiasm was evoked by his appearance at Borysthenes.
But the most striking example of his influence and personality
(if the story can be believed) is an incident which occurred at
the very end of his exile. 1 On his way back from the country
of the Getae he was staying incognito in the Roman legionary
camp of Viminacium, when the news of Domitian's murder
came through. Domitian was popular with the soldiers, and
the news of Nerva's succession to the principate aroused the
men at Viminacium to the point of revolt. Dio realized the
critical nature of the situation, * flung aside his disguise with
the words " Out of the rags stepped forth many-counselling
Odysseus " and stood before them, no beggar, but Dio the
philosopher '. He delivered a speech in which he denounced
the murdered Emperor and praised, from personal experience,
his successor ; apparently he was successful in quelling the
disturbance. One remembers that Musonius was not so
successful in an attempt to soothe infuriated Roman soldiers. 2

Dio had been ' to the ends of the earth ' in fulfilment of the
oracle's advice, and the death of Domitian meant that his exile
was at end, for he was immediately recalled by Nerva. He
returned to Prusa, to be loaded with honours by his own and
neighbouring states. Illness delayed a project of going to
Rome on behalf of Prusa, and when it could be realized Nerva
was dead and Trajan had succeeded him. The favour he
enjoyed from the latter is a tribute both to his own character
and to the discernment of the Emperor. Philostratus, in his
zeal for glorifying Dio at the expense of Trajan, tells a ludicrous
1 Philos., vita Soph., sv. Dio. 2 Tac., Hist., iii. 81.

IS4 A HISTORY OF CYNICISM

story 1 which gives a completely false picture of their relation-
ship. According to him, Dio is the brilliant sophist, Trajan
the simple soldier, admiring but bewildered, ' who would often
exclaim " I can't understand a word you say, Dio, but I love
you as myself ".' But as von Arnim points out, there were
good reasons why an earnest and enlightened ruler like Trajan
should have found Dio highly useful. He was a person of
much influence in Bithynia, and we know from Pliny that the
province was then giving the Emperor considerable anxiety.
Again, his fourteen years of wandering and his familiarity with
the lives of the common people must have given him a know-
ledge of conditions in the north-eastern portion of the Roman
Empire which few could have equalled. The fact that he had
lived for some time among the Getae must also have
commended him to Trajan, in view of his plans for taking the
offensive against these troublesome enemies. Finally his
reputation both as a philosopher and a Hellenist made him an
important figure in the Greek-speaking portion of the Roman
Empire ; and it was in some sense as a representative of the
educated classes of that very important section, that he delivered
before Trajan the four speeches ne^l fiaaiheiau;, expressing
its hopes and expectations from the new regime. In these
speeches one may see the triumph of Stoic- Cynic propaganda,
the realization of that conception of the philosopher as the
counsellor of kings which the Cynics had depicted in their
favourite fiction of Diogenes giving advice to Alexander. But
this was no fictitious encounter : the Stoic-Cynic ideas of the
fiaaifeia were being preached to the ' master of the world . . .
the vice-regent of God on earth ', in person.

Oration i, the first to be delivered before Trajan, shows that
Dio was well aware of the importance of the occasion. The
speech is extremely skilful : the beginning is modest and
unassuming : there is a straightforward description * in plain
and simple language J of the good king according to Homer,
ending with the remark, * If any of these qualities appear to
belong to you, happy are you in your noble and gracious
character, and happy are we who share in its benefit.' 2 Then
a loftier note is struck by the reference to Zeus, * king of mortals
and pattern of kings ', and of the universe, ' the embodiment
of bliss and wisdom, sweeping in infinite cycles through infinite

1 Apparently believed by Dill (op. cit., p. 368). 2 c. 36.

CYNICISM IN THE SECOND CENTURY A.D. 155

time, guided by good fortune and the divine power, and by
providence (UQovota) and the most righteous and perfect of
governing principles '. But with the remark that these themes
are too vast for the time available Dio introduces a * sacred
and edifying parable ' (/tvOoc;) which Trajan is advised to
' reflect upon in private '. During his exile Dio once lost his
way in a remote part of the Peloponnese, and came to a rude
shrine, by which dwelt a venerable old woman. The shrine
was that of Heracles, and the woman gifted with the power of
divination. She prophesied that Dio's exile would end before
long, as would the ' period of tribulation for mankind ', i.e.
the rule of Domitian. * Some day ', she told Dio, ' you will
meet a mighty man, the ruler of many lands and peoples.
Do not hesitate to tell him the following parable, even though
many scoff at you.' The parable is the famous story of the
Choice of Heracles, to which we have already referred.
Heracles, it will be remembered, makes the choice between
Kingship and Tyranny. Heracles himself is depicted as
having several of the traits of Trajan, while the picture of
tyranny is unmistakably drawn from Domitian. At the end
of the speech it is said that Heracles would give honour and
protection in his life wherever he found a kingdom and a
king, * and this work he continues to this day, for in him you
have a helper and protector of your government, so long as
you reign like a king ' (Scog av rvy%dvr]G paaihevoov). 1 The
other three speeches lack the eloquence of the first, but are
equally governed by Stoic- Cynic ideas. The true king must
have naQTSQia and undergo novo$, he is the bringer of o^ovota
to his people : he is symbolized by the shepherd of the flock,
the bull of the herd, the ' king ' of the bees. The familiar
Cynic stock-figure of Sardanapalus as the king led astray by
pleasure (<pt,Atfdovo$ paaifevs), of Alexander as the immoderate
lover of glory ((pdcxWfog), of Diogenes as the wise adviser,
are exhibited, not to a small crowd in some unimportant city
of Pontus or Greece, but before the Roman Emperor himself.
Despite the evidence of rhetorical ability they display, these
speeches were not mere entdelgei*;. The principles of the

1 The coinage of the second century, particularly that of Antoninus,
shows the devotion professed by the Emperors to the cult of Heracles,
the guardian deity of the good king. Rostovtseff, op. cit., sv.
Heracles.

156 A HISTORY OF CYNICISM

they envisaged were actually those that governed the
administration of Trajan and his three successors. 1 Admit-
tedly that practical experience of administration which was the
legacy of a long line of Roman statesmen had more to do with
the establishment of the benevolent government of the age than
had the theories of the philosophers. But it is true to say that
during this period, the Golden Age of the government in the
ancient world, philosophy played well its part of adviser and
encourager of men of affairs.

Apart from the orations negl Paoiheias there is naturally
less trace of Cynic influence in Dio's speeches after his return
from exile. The Alexandrine Oration is the speech of an
unofficial representative of the Emperor : the numerous
speeches delivered in Bithynia and Asia those of a man * of
wide knowledge of men and the world J giving advice on local
politics and government. But his fourteen years' exile had
left on Dio an indelible impression, and towards the end of
his life we find him corning back to the problem of the poor,
and what manner of life they are to lead. His views are set
out in the famous seventh oration, which is based upon Stoic
and Cynic ethical ideals, though it is the production of a man
of wide experience of social conditions in the Roman Empire. 2
It is worth while to give a summary of its main ideas, if only
to show how careful one must be not to interpret from modern
analogies the description of Cynicism as * the philosophy of
the proletariat '. The discourse was intended to be a serious
contribution to a grave social problem rather than a theoretical
discussion of poverty, for Dio expresses the hope that it will
be found useful both in the government of cities, and for poor
people in search of employment. 3 It differs from most schemes
of reform offered to the modern proletariat in that economics
are throughout subordinated to ethics. The object of man
is to live a virtuous life, and of itself poverty is no hindrance
to that end. Indeed, says Dio, ' poverty seems to have some-
thing holy about it ', and

one must consider whether in word and deed and in their relations
with each other the poor are by reason of their poverty at a dis-
advantage compared with the rich so far as leading a seemly life

1 Cf . Rostovtseff, op. cit., p. ii4ff.
8 SeelNote 2 to Chap. VIII. 8 Or. 7, c. 127.

CYNICISM IN THE SECOND CENTURY A.D. 157

and one according to nature, or whether they do enjoy an advantage
in every respect. 1

The familiar and delightful description of the Euboean peasants
proves that in Dio's opinion the latter is the case. Their toil
in the fields and their self-sufficiency bring them nearer to the
4 life according to Nature ' than it is possible for any one to be
in an urban civilization. The occupations of farmer, hunter
or shepherd are therefore suitable for the poor : thus employed,
they will be able to lead happier and more useful lives than
those engaged in the struggle for wealth. Dio then passes to
the more difficult problems which confront the poor in a large
city. The best solution, he thinks, would be to remove all the
1 respectable poor ' (ol xop,yol nevrirai) 2 from the cities and
settle them in the country. For urban civilization really
demands that all its members should be prosperous, since in
a city money is indispensable ; to its poor it can offer little
but a choice between degrading employment and idleness.
However, failing this solution, even in cities honourable
employment can be found for the poor. Unfortunately the
discourse as we have it is not complete, and while Dio expressly
mentions many occupations that are unsuitable for the poor,
we have few indications of those which he felt they could
safely follow. The only occupations he expressly commends
are those of the hired servant, the attendant, and the school-
master ; but since he also approves of the * artisan '
(%eiQOT%vrj<;), it is to be presumed that in the last portion
of the discourse the various praiseworthy re'/vai were dis-
cussed. None the less, it is apparent that his real desire was
to see ' all the respectable poor, by any means possible, become
rustics '. 3 There is little need to dwell upon the urgent
necessity of some such scheme of ' back to the land ' for large
areas of the Roman Empire in Dio's time. In Italy and
Greece, in particular, agriculture was at a low ebb, and much
land had gone out of cultivation. In the little city to which
the Euboean peasants of this oration belong two-thirds of the
land without the walls was uncultivated, while much of that
within them was sown or pasture-land, and sheep grazed in
the market-place. On the other hand the great cities of the
Empire, especially Rome and Alexandria, had vast, idle city

1 ib., c. 81. 2 ib., c. 107. 3 108.

158 A HISTORY OF CYNICISM

mobs who were a standing nuisance to their rulers and for
whom no useful occupation was ever found. The difference
between Dio's scheme of social reform and the majority of
those of modern times is also obvious. There is no attempt
to obviate poverty as such : Dio appears to assume that the
poor we shall always have with us, and the problem is to
provide them with suitable employment. Consequently he
can dispense with schemes for redistributing wealth ; once
the poor have been found suitable occupations they should be
capable of leading happy lives ; if they do not, the cause is
not the injustice of social conditions but their own indulgence
in the fault of

(c) Demonax

The only authority for Demonax is the Life 1 that has come
down under the name of Lucian. It is obviously conceived
as a panegyric, but there is no reason to doubt its evidence on
the few details it gives of Demonax* career, nor its general
description of his character. Demonax came of a good family

1 The question of its genuineness has long been a vexed one.
Those who regard it as spurious mainly rely on two arguments.
(a) The feebleness of the anecdotes it contains ; Lucian, however
prejudiced, is usually amusing. But this is the only work in the
Lucianic corpus which belongs to the genre of the ano^vr]^ dvsv/uaTa,
a genre whose conventions give little scope to the personal merits
of the author, (b) The remark that the writer has elsewhere written
of Demonax' contemporary, Sostratus, who bore the nickname of
' Heracles '. Such a treatise is not to be found in the extant works
of Lucian, nor is there any reference to it elsewhere. But this is not
a conclusive objection the work may have been written and never
published. At any rate, if published, it seems quickly to have been
forgotten, for Philostratus, writing some fifty years after the death
of Demonax, takes his account of this * Heracles ' from a letter of
Herodes Atticus. Funk (PhiloL, Suppl. 10 [1907]) considers the
work to be that of Lucian ; he points out that the sceptical, eclectic
nature of Demonax is that of Lucian himself, and of his philosophic
mouthpiece Menippus. Lucian, he concludes, was greatly influenced
by Demonax. One may perhaps quote in this connexion the remark
made in the Fugitivi that ' there are some few genuine philosophers
left in Greece ' (i.e. in Athens). May not this be a reference to
Demonax ? On the whole, the case for regarding the work as spurious
is not convincing. But, as Zeller says, its value as evidence for
Demonax is not affected if we refuse to accept Lucian as the author ;
whoever the author was, he was a contemporary of Demonax and
had long been familiar with him.

CYNICISM IN THE SECOND CENTURY A.D. 159

in Cyprus, and received a thorough literary education and
rhetorical training. But he was led by an * inherent love of
philosophy ' (e/tyvrov nqo<; (pdoaoylav HQCOTOS) to lead a
life which would * set an example to all who saw him of his
intellect and of the sincerity of his philosophy '. His philo-
sophic * teachers ' were Demetrius, Epictetus and Agatho-
boulos two Cynics and a Stoic his rhetorical training was
probably received under the sophist and eclectic philosopher
Timocrates of Heraclia. He was himself an eclectic in that
' he would never reveal which form of philosophy he favoured ' ;
of the philosophers he ' thought all were admirable, but revered
Socrates, wondered at Diogenes, and loved Aristippus '. But
in dress he was a Cynic, and what we are told of his work at
Athens suggests that he combined the * philanthropy ' of Crates
with the scepticism and nihilism of Menippus.

When he first came to Athens is not known. 1 He was given
Athenian citizenship, entered political life, and, possibly because
of the reputation he had acquired in Cyprus, quickly attained
office. But his outspokenness made him many enemies, and
he was prosecuted, like Socrates, on a charge of impiety, for

1 Few details are certain about his chronology. We know that he
lived to be nearly a hundred, but are told nothing of the dates of his
birth or death. An anecdote which brings him into contact with
Peregrinus Proteus suggests that he must have been teaching in
Athens later than A.D. 159, the probable date of Proteus' arrival in
Greece ; on the other hand we are told of a remark he made about
Apollonius of Tyana when the latter was * going from Athens to be
tutor to the Emperor \ The Emperor in question was Titus
(Philost., vi. 30) ; which would mean that Demonax was already in
Athens about A.D. 72, and hence can hardly have been born later
than A.D. 50. Of the two stories I prefer to reject the second, since
all other persons with whom he is said to have been in contact in
Athens belong to the second century so far as we know. The later
date, too, best fits what is said of his lengthy philosophical training.
Epictetus set up his school at Nicopolis in 94 ; Demetrius cannot
have * taught ' in Greece earlier than 75 ; the floruit of Agathoboulos
was c. 1 20. Moreover, Demonax appears to have taken some part
in the politics of Cyprus ; probably he was middle-aged when he
came to Athens. For the date of his death, the passage of the Fugitivi
quoted in the last note is relevant. If the reference is to Demonax,
he must have been living after the death of Peregrinus in 167. I
therefore suggest that his life may best be dated c. A.D. 70-170 ; that
he * studied ', probably in that order, with Demetrius, Epictetus,
Timocrates, and Agathoboulos, and that he came to Athens about
120.

160 A HISTORY OF CYNICISM

he refused to sacrifice to Athena, and was the only citizen of
Athens who had not been initiated into the Eleusinian mysteries.
The boldness of his defence caused him to be acquitted;
thenceforward he acquired an extraordinary influence and
prestige at Athens, until at the end of his life he was regarded
with universal veneration and affection.

His philosophical activities appear to have been entirely
devoted to the naQaivstwd*; TOJIOC;.

When any of his friends were apparently prosperous, he would
remind them that they were elated over imaginary and ephemeral
blessings. Others, who were bewailing poverty, or finding exile
hard to bear, or complaining of old age or sickness, he would laugh-
ingly console, pointing out that they did not realize how soon their
troubles would end, and that they would soon find forgetfulness
of their lot, good or bad, and lasting freedom. He also made it
his concern to compose the quarrels of brothers, and to negotiate
peace between husband and wife. On occasion he spoke words
of reason to angry mobs, and usually persuaded them to serve their
country in a sensible manner.

These activities, together with what we are told about his
kindliness and charm of manner, and his dictum that we should
hate sin but love sinners, recall Epictetus' conception of the
Ideal Cynic ; doubtless Epictetus' views had much influence
on his pupil. 1 But Epictetus held that the Cynic should
abstain from political affairs, while Demonax * played a part in
society and politics ', and, as we have seen, even held office.
It will be remembered that Dio Chrysostom, after his return
from exile, was concerned with political issues much more
important than the municipal affairs of Athens, and indeed he
held that * the work of the true philosopher is no other than
the rule of men '. 2 From Chrysippus onwards the Stoics
were divided as to the proper attitude of the oo<p6<; to politics.
Those who regarded philosophy, as Epictetus did Cynicism,
as a special service for an emergency, would allow nothing to
interfere with the primary duties of the philosopher ; and of
course a * political career ' with its attendant ambitions would
at all times be improper for the ao(po<;. But where a philos-
opher possessed influence in the State (whether through family
connexions and philosophic reputation combined, as in the
case of Dio, or, like Demonax, through mere force of character),
1 See below, p. 190 f. z Or. 49.

CYNICISM IN THE SECOND CENTURY A.D. 161

then it was proper for him to come forward and give advice
on public affairs. For the philosopher's duty is to ally himself
with the Law and Order of the Universe, whose earthly
manifestation is the Law and Order prevailing in the well-
ordered State (cf. once more Dio's conception of the virtues
attendant on the Good King, and his duties as the bringer of
Peace and ojuorola). It was in this spirit that Demonax
quelled civic disturbance by his mere appearance in the
Assembly, 1 and dissuaded the Athenians from instituting
gladiatorial shows in emulation of Corinth.

In sharp contrast with his contemporary, Peregrinus Proteus,
he mitigated the austerities of Cynic life; he abandoned its
vagrancy and mendicancy ; its traditional squalor and theatri-
cality, in fact, as Praechter 2 says, all that aspect of Cynicism
governed by the slogan naQa^dqarrsiv TO vofjiia^a. Towards
the end of his life

he used to eat and sleep uninvited in any house which he happened
to be passing, and its occupants regarded it as some divine visita-
tion, and thought that a Good Spirit (ayaQ6<; dai/uwv) had entered
their house. The bread- women would try to attract his attention
as he passed by, each wanting him to take bread from her, and the
one who was successful thought she had brought herself luck. The
children, too, would bring him fruit, and call him father. . . .
When he died, the Athenians gave him a magnificent public funeral
. . . afterwards they would bow down before the stone on which
he used to rest when tired ; and hang it with garlands, feeling that
the very stone on which he sat was sacred. The whole city attended
his funeral, especially the philosophers, who carried his body to
the grave.

Unless the panegyric is grossly exaggerated and there is
no reason to believe that it is Demonax can stand with Crates
as an embodiment of the Cynic ideal of (pdavOgcoma the
service of mankind. The scene of his ministry, the Athens
of the second century, was of course a place of no great impor-
tance ; its greatness had long left it, and it was now little more
than a University town in a declining province. But it would
have been well for the Roman Empire if men like Demonax
had been found in its municipalities in the next two centuries.

1 Cf. the stories of attempts by Musonius and Dio to quell riots,

P. 153.

2 In Ueberweg, Gesch. d. Phil., Vol. i, p. 511.

12

i6z A HISTORY OF CYNICISM

For the alienation of so many of the better elements from any
interest in public life or the conduct of political affairs was
one of the most potent causes of the decline and fall of the
Empire.

(d) Oenomaus of Gadara

Authorities for the date of Oenomaus disagree, though
it is highly probable that his floruit was in the reign of
Hadrian. 1 There is no evidence for the dates of his birth
and death, nor for his family. His native city was Gadara
in Peraea, one of those Greek cities in Syria whose ruins
testify to the high degree of material prosperity they enjoyed
in the second century A.D. It was perhaps in revolt against
the luxury of his day that Oenomaus turned his thoughts to
philosophy, and came to Colophon to ask Clarius Apollo for
guidance and advice. How he was disappointed will be seen ;
at present it is to be remarked that he does not say that his
search for a master was successful, and he may well have been,
like Dio Chrysostom, avrodldanroi; ngoq aQertfv. We do
not know whether he followed the vagrant Cynic life ; Demonax
was his contemporary, but there are no stories of contact
between them. Indeed, all that we hear of his relations with
contemporaries is the interesting evidence, collected by
Vallette, 2 which suggests that he may be identical with that
pagan philosopher 'Abnimos Hagardi ', who appears in
Hebrew tradition as the friend of the second- century Rabbi
Meir. The identification, however, is far from certain, for
according to Hebrew scholars the Hebraic equivalent of
Abnimos can with difficulty stand for the Greek Oenomaus ;
and the anecdotes themselves are devoid of any individual
characterization which might offer a pointer. Probably little
more can be said than that there is nothing inherently unlikely
in a story of contact between a Cynic and a Jewish rabbi in
Syria in the second century A.D.

Unlike Demonax and Demetrius, then, Oenomaus is known
to us only through his writings. To judge from their titles,
these appear to have followed the old Cynic models. The list
of Suidas mentions the following : tleql
negl rfjs naQ' "OfjiriQov yihoaocpicu;, m^l K^

Julian speaks of an avroycovla rov xvvos, a Kara TOJV

1 See Note 3 to Chap. VIII. 2 De Oenomao Cynico, p. 6 ff.

CYNICISM IN THE SECOND CENTURY A.D. 163

XQrjarrjQicov and of tragedies. 1 Vallette conjectures that * avro-
(pcovia TOV Kvvot; ' is an alternative title for the book neql
Kwictfjiov ; Julian says that ' according to Oenomaus,
Cynicism is neither Antisthenism nor Diogenism ', 2 no doubt
in reference to the famous claim that Heracles is the real pro-
totype of the Cynic life. %Qr\viiol avrocpwvoi are oracles
delivered directly by the god, without the agency of priest
or omen. The ingenious ^^cr/ioi avrofpwvoi, of Alexander of
Abonuteichos were one of his most effective pieces of publicity,
as we know from Lucian. In the avrocpawia TOV Kvvoq then,
Oenomaus may well have given the precepts of the * philosophy '
itself, as Crusius says, it represented Des Kyon leibhafte Stimmef
heard directly and not through its prophet Diogenes. One
may further suggest that these precepts were in verse, and
were parodies of oracles like those found in the yorjrcov qpcoQa.
This would be in the vein of Crates ; in the Politeia and the
Tragedies Oenomaus was following the model of Diogenes.
These last seem to have maintained the traditional Cynic
dvaldeia, to judge from the horrified comments of Julian.
Of the book On the Philosophy according to Homer nothing
more than the title is known ; Vallette conjectures that it
burlesqued the stories of gods and heroes. Our judgement of
Oenomaus must be based on the surviving passages of the
yorjTcov (pd)Qa The Charlatans Exposed, which Valette identifies
with the book Against the Oracles mentioned by Julian. 4

The yorjTcov <pa)()a. The book is known to us through passages
quoted by Eusebius in the Praeparatio Evangelica to support
his attack on divination ; some of his quotations were used
again by Theodoretus. It does not seem likely that the
passages as quoted by Eusebius preserve the order of Oenomaus,
but as we have them, they fall into three divisions : (i) an
analysis of famous oracles, revealing their worthlessness, (2)
the story of Oenomaus' own experiences at the shrine of
Clarius Apollo, (3) a general refutation, on quasi-philosophical
grounds, of the possibility of prophecy. The oracles quoted
are all taken from classical Greek history or mythology ; the
reason being obvious in the light of Plutarch's statement 6 that,
owing to the decay of the Greek cities and their loss of

1 Or. vii. 209. 2 Or. vi., 187 B.C.

3 Crusius, xliv. (1889), p. 309 ff.

4 Cf. Vallette, op. cit., p. 54, &c. 5 Plut., de Pyth. Or., 28.

164 A HISTORY OF CYNICISM

independence, no important public oracles had been given
for several generations. The Delphic god himself is the
* imaginary adversary ' of the Cynic's diatribe ; his oracles
are analysed, shown to be absurd or worthless, and in most
cases the unfortunate deity is then roundly abused. Two
kinds of oracle are dealt with, (i) those which claim to be
prophecies of the future, e.g. the famous reply to Croesus, or
the oracles given to the Athenians and Spartans in the Persian
War, (2) those which give advice, as the oracle to Lycurgus.
Of the first class, it is observed that they evince no real know-
ledge of the future, but only shrewdness in realizing the possible
issues of the event, and ingenuity in composing a response
which would be equally applicable to any one of them. One
example will suffice to show Oenomaus' method his treat-
ment of the oracle given to the Athenians at the beginning of
the invasion of Xerxes. The oracle says that the wooden
walls will alone be invincible, * let them not withstand the foe
with horse and foot, but turn their backs : elsewhere shall the
foe front them. O divine Salamis, thou shalt destroy the sons
of women, either when Demeter scatters or when she is
gathering the corn.* 1 It did not need a god, is Oenomaus'
comment, to forecast that the Athenians, weak in infantry and
cavalry, would find their best refuge in the ' wooden walls ' of
their fleet. And as for the couplet about Salamis, the god
has not predicted what the result of the battle will be ; as
for its season, he knew that naval battles are not fought in
winter, and the phrase * either when Demeter scatters or when
she gathers the corn ' pretty well covers the rest of the year.
(It may be urged that Apollo did get the place of the battle
right, but Oenomaus characteristically refuses to give him
any credit for it.) When the god has been exposed as a prophet,
he is then arraigned as a giver of advice. The divine advice,
as revealed in oracles, is ' either commonplace or harmful.
Consider the precepts of good government given to Lycurgus. 2

So long as ye keep your promises and oaths to the oracles, and
preserve justice in relations with each other and with strangers and
with piety and reverence honour old age, and honour too the Tyn-
daridae and Menelaus and the other deathless heroes whom divine
Lacedaemon contains, even so long shall Zeus spare you.

1 Vail., op. cit., p. 39 ff. 2 id., ib., p. 50.

CYNICISM IN THE SECOND CENTURY A.D. 165

Commonplace stuff, says Oenomaus is that the sort of thing
people come from the land of the Hyperboreans to hear ?
Any nurse could have done better. Again, oracles giving
advice on marriage, on the begetting of children, and on exile
are unfavourably compared with the teachings of Socrates on
the same subjects. Sometimes Oenomaus, in the manner of
Crates, emends the response of the oracle, so that they convey
the true precepts of philosophy. When not platitudinous, he
says, the oracles are harmful, as when they promise immor-
tality to stupid athletes like Theagenes or indecent poets such
as Archilochus, or befriend tyrants, as in the case of Cypselus.
The whole tone of the attack is rhetorical, with small regard
for either logic or consistency ; any stick will serve to beat
Apollo. For while dislike of athletes conies well enough from
a Cynic, the criticism of Archilochus for obscenity ill befits
Oenomaus, whose own writings were so indecent that Julian
cannot find a fit comparison for them. The oracle is reproved
for not encouraging the Athenians and Spartans in their
patriotic duties in the Persian War ; it is also reproved for
answering Homer's question about the city of his birth as
well, says Oenomaus, might the god tell a dung-beetle about
its native dung-heap. Again, Apollo is blamed for his treachery
to his devout worshipper, Croesus of Lydia ; but for his
support of Cypselus of Corinth he is stigmatized as the ' friend
of tyrants '. In other words, Oenomaus is perfectly willing to
drop the mask of the Cynic whenever it suits him to do so,
just as the arch-sceptic Lucian poses on occasion as a pious
believer in the Olympian gods. 1 But nowhere is his unfairness
more obvious than in his treatment of the oracle given to Laius. 2
We have seen how Oenomaus has satirized oracles worded so
ambiguously that they would fit any event ; in this case,
Apollo was quite definite, Laius was to be slain by his son.
Such a prediction, say Oenomaus, is impossible, it involves too
many unknowns, for Laius might refuse to beget children, or
Oedipus, if born at all, might refuse to be tyrant of Thebes,
and so on. Apollo is therefore pretending a knowledge he
cannot have possessed. But, says the god, it turned out as I
foretold. ' Pure luck ', is the reply.

1 De mort. Per., c. 13 and 21 ; cf. Bernays, Lukian und die Kyniker,
p. 56.

2 Vail., op. cit., pp. 74 ff.

166 A HISTORY OF CYNICISM

To the modern reader, however, the most interesting
passage is that in which Oenomaus describes his own experi-
ences with the oracle of Clarius Apollo at Colophon. 1 The
shrine was one which enjoyed great celebrity at the time,
perhaps due to the manner in which its responses were given.
For, according to Tacitus, 2

. . . the priest merely ascertains the number and the names of the
consultants ; then he goes into a cave, drinks water from a hidden
spring, and, though as a rule he knows nothing of poetry or letters,
he delivers oracular replies in verse on the subjects which each man
has in mind.

An apt response would thus be an impressive achievement on
the part of the god, and on one occasion a sceptical Roman
proconsul was notably disconcerted. 3 Oenomaus does not
tell us the precise form of the question he put to the god ; he
calls it * a philosophical transaction ' (ejunogla negi aoqptas),
and it is clear that it had to do with the acquisition of oocpia
or aQerr]. The oracle replied :

There in the land of Trachis the garden of Heracles bloometh,
Bearing all manner of fruits, which all men daily do gather,
Naught shall be lacking there, 'tis dowered with waters unfailing.

* Fool that I was,' says Oenomaus, * I was elated when I heard
of Heracles and his garden, 4 and the mention of Trachis made
me think of the sweat of Hesiod, and then again I thought I
should have an easy life through the flowering garden.' His
train of thought is elucidated by Vallette. T()fj%ivo<; atr] made

1 id., ib., pp. 34-8. 2 Annals, ii. 54.

3 Plut., de Def. Or., c. 45.

4 sh* eycb dxovaag 6 pdxr]ko$ Hal avroi; vn6 rov f Hgaxheovc, eqpvarjdqv
KCH rov * Hgaxhrjiov xr)nov OdAAovrog . Of the'Jast four words Vallette
says * haec verba quid sententiae addant equidem non perspicio '.
He is attracted by the emendation of Guenther (Genethl. Getting.,
p. 19), who transposes the text to read, eh 9 sycb dxovcraQ 6 /fcb^Aoc
rov f HQaxhr)iov xtfnov fldAAovfo?, xal avro<; vn6 TO# Y/gaxAe'ovc l(pvcf^0r)v.
But it may be suggested that the text makes sense as it stands.
May not the * garden of Heracles ' have reminded Oenomaus of the
other Cynic paradise, * the isle of Pera ' described by Crates ? (see
above, p. 44). Heracles was the great example of the life of novos
and also the patron saint of the Cynics : Oenomaus may well have
taken the oracle as a command to lead the Cynic life. Of course,
according*to the Cynic paradox the Kvvixoq fttog was the easiest open
to mankind.

CYNICISM IN THE SECOND CENTURY A.D. 167

him think of the rqr}%vv ofyov of the famous lines of Hesiod,
which were so constantly quoted as a maxim of philosophy.

rfjfe d 9 aQETfJG TtQonaQOiOev Qeoi idgajra eOtjxav
dOavaroi. JUCLXQOS de xal ogOioq ol/uo$ eg avrrjv
tcai IQWIX; to TZQCOTOV. enrjv d' eq OLHQOV M
f) eneira nkei> %ahenii neg eovaa

That TroVog must precede CLQSTJJ was of course axiomatic ;
Oenomaus therefore took the oracle as meaning that if he
would undertake the rigours demanded by Philosophy he
should thereafter have a happy life. But as he was putting
the question as to whether the gods would help him in his
project, one of the bystanders said that he had heard precisely
the same reply given to one Callistratus, a business man from
Pontus. Oenomaus, not unnaturally, was indignant that the
god should make no difference between questions relating to
philosophy and mundane business affairs ' I felt as though
Callistratus had robbed me of my d^er^,' he says. Neverthe-
less, he asked Callistratus whether he too had been cheered by
the mention of Heracles. Callistratus, it seemed, had also
interpreted the oracle according to his lights, * he expected
that he would have to work hard, then he could expect a profit,
and after that he would be able to have a good time '.

When I realized [says Oenomaus] what his labours were like, and
also the orgies he had in mind, I refused the comparison and the
oracle alike. . . . For after all, robber, soldier, lover, flatterer,
rhetorician, and sycophant, might all claim that oracle, for each one
of them might expect toil, to be followed by pleasure.

But apparently Oenomaus had not yet lost faith in oracles.
For * when he was making some progress, and needed a guide
to philosophy, but such a man was hard to find ', he came
again to Colophon to ask Apollo's guidance. ' Thy business
shall be done 'midst easy men, and Greeks/ came the reply.
Too vague, is Oenomaus' complaint after all, if a man were
seeking a master in painting or sculpture he would hardly be
satisfied with the reply, * Thy business shall be done 'midst
easy men, and Greeks.' In order to get more explicit informa-
tion, he asked, * Where had I best go from Colophon ? ' But
either the oracle was by now getting tired of Oenomaus, or
else it decided that his wish for a personal response should be

168 A HISTORY OF CYNICISM

at last gratified. At all events, he was answered with this
effusion :

Far, far off from hence stands a man who whirleth a slingbow,
Countless the geese he slays with stones, as they browse upon herbage.

This was the last straw for Oenomaus. Who could find
a meaning for the countless geese ? he asks. Away with
you, Apollo, innumerable geese, incomprehensible oracle, and
all!

In the final portion l of the passages quoted Oenomaus
passes from the particular to the general, and demonstrates the
uselessness of divination on the theory of predestination, and
its impossibility on that of free-will. As representatives of
the former theory he names Democritus, whose mechanical
chain of cause and effect leads mankind into slavery, and
Chrysippus, whose doctrine of ' principal and secondary causes '
involves a * modified slavery ' (^/-adovAfi/av), which is the most
ridiculous theory of all. For, if everything is predestined, what
is the use of such oracles as that given to Carystus ? * Carystus,
dear son of famed Cheiron, leave Pelion and seek the heights
of Euboea, where it is decreed that thou must found a sacred
shrine. Go, and delay not.' * But is anything in the power
of man ? ' Carystus might say ; * is it in my power to wish to
leave Pelion ? I have heard wise men, many of them, say that
if it is determined that I shall ascend the heights of Euboea and
found a sacred shrine, I shall ascend them and found it,
whether you bid me or no, whether I am willing or not.'
Again, on the theory of predestination, how can one find fault
with the bad ? One can praise virtue, but not the virtuous,
like Chrysippus or Cleanthes, for they are so through no merit
of their own. And what right have they to abuse Epicurus ?
On this theory, then, oracles will be useless, since no warning
can avail to divert destiny from its course.

But, according to Oenomaus, the theory of predestination is
wrong. For the only basis of knowledge is the evidence of
our senses, and our perception of ourselves (YI ovvaiaQrioit; re
Hal avnkfiyiq THJL&V avra>v). By this faculty we may discern
the motions and impulses that lie within our own choice (rcov
iv r\iJiiv avQaiQirwv nal piaicov). Hence we know the
difference between walking and being led, between choosing

1 Vail., op. cit., pp. 68-80.

CYNICISM IN THE SECOND CENTURY A.D. 169

and being forced. Our own will is therefore itself the * first
cause ' (aQX?]) of many matters. Consider, in the light of this,
the oracle given to Laius, that he should be killed by his
own son ; the oracle which Chrysippus chose to demonstrate
his own compromise between free-will and predestination.
According to Chrysippus, it was within the power of Laius to
refuse to beget children, but the god could foresee that if he
did beget them, he would be slain by his son. But the son, too,
is master of his will ; it is within his choice whether or not he
will slay his father. Similarly, the oracle ' that the whole of
his house shall be drowned in blood * the event depends on
too many unknowns to make prediction possible. For,

on either argument [i.e. * complete free-will, or the modified free-
will of Chrysippus '], living things give rise within themselves either
to few or to many First Causes. Now each First Cause cuts out
what has gone before it and introduces other events (at de dgxal
del rd IA%QI,<; avrwv diaxoyacrcu avrai d'AAa ngodyovai n^dy/iaxa).
These in their turn can progress only so long as no other First Cause
appears to prevent what comes after it from following on what went
before it, and to force succeeding events to be dependent on itself.
An ass or a dog or a flea can be a First Cause : let none deprive
even a flea of its functions. For your flea is a being moved by an
impulse (<%/??) of its own, which may sometimes become involved
in human affairs, and constitute itself the First Cause of some chain
of events.

In the section under consideration Oenomaus shows a
knowledge of philosophy unusual in a Cynic, but of course
he is not the originator of the arguments employed. The
Stoic theory of eiQ^aQ^evrj (fatum) is refuted by arguments
which, as Vallette l shows, are used by Cicero in the De Fata
and the De Divinatione. Cicero himself, as is well known,
employed the weapons of the New Academy, and particularly
of Carneades. The theory of sense-perception is not Academic.
Vallette thinks it may be that of the Epicureans, although it does
not reproduce accurately their terminology. Oenomaus thus
borrows familiar arguments to prove his point, in exactly the
same manner as Eusebius was later to borrow from him.

The conclusion to be drawn from the whole treatise is that,
since knowledge of the future is impossible, oracles do not
proceed from the gods, but are impudent frauds perpetrated
1 op. cit., pp. 116, 117.

170 A HISTORY OF CYNICISM

by the human custodians of the temples. It will at once be
seen how Oenoinaus differed from Epictetus, whose idealized
Cynic enjoyed the privilege of ' dreams and omens, and
converse with the gods ' ; also from Demetrius, who appears,
from his profession of resignation to the will of Heaven, to
have believed in the Stoic theory of e^jua^^vr]. It does not
follow from Oenomaus' arguments that the gods do not exist,
for it is open to him to agree with the Epicureans that they do
exist, but take no * interest in human affairs J . But it is easy
to see why Julian calls him ' a scorner of everything human and
divine ', whose object was ' to do away with all reverence for
the gods and to dishonour human wisdom ' (he means, of
course, the wisdom of the Stoics). For according to Julian,
the gods manifest their providence (nQovoia) for the human
race through the medium of oracles ; but the arguments of
Oenomaus about the impossibility of knowledge of the future
sweep away providence and oracles alike. If his views of the
freedom of choice possessed by the human will were accepted,
there would be an end of the reign of the gods, whose statues
he calls ' the wooden and stone masters of man '. But those
who do not share the scruples of the pious Emperor must admit
that the book is perhaps the most interesting piece of Cynic
literature we possess. 1 Despite its rhetorical tone, lack of
original thought, and deficiencies in logic, it is good popular
polemic, on much the same intellectual level as popular contri-
butions to the Darwinian controversy in the last century.
And it is yet another example of that vein of mocking scepticism
which, remembering Menippus and Lucian, we may call the
peculiar contribution of Syria to Greek literature.

(e) Peregrinus

Unfortunately, authorities for Peregrinus are not satisfactory.
The brief references in Tatian, Athenagoras, Aulus Gellius,
Philostratus, and Ammianus Marcellinus are of minor impor-
tance compared with Lucian 's work On the Death of Peregrinus >
but the use of this last is beset with obvious difficulties. It is
throughout a polemic, for Lucian had an intense dislike of
Peregrinus on both general and personal grounds. No
eighteenth-century divine had a more rooted objection to

1 Bernays (op. cit., p. 35) calls it ' einer Schrift, die zu den leben-
digst geschrieben Prosawerken des zweiten Jahrhunderts geh6rt *,

CYNICISM IN THE SECOND CENTURY A.D. 171

' enthusiasm ' than had Lucian 1 and indeed it cannot be
denied that scepticism such as his was a healthy antidote to
the generally superstitious atmosphere of his age but as a
result he is always open to suspicion when he is dealing with
persons of a mystic or religious temperament. Moreover,
Lucian's information about Peregrinus' private life is derived
from his fellow-citizens, and we know that as a result of law-
suits there was much ill-feeling towards him in Parium. The
story of his career is told in a speech by an unnamed person at
the Olympic festival, in opposition to the encomium of his
follower Theagenes : it is really, as Bernays 2 conjectures, an
invective by Lucian. Ancient invective never dealt in half-
tones, its villains were always coloured in the deepest dye.
The danger of any attempt at revaluation is of going too far,
and achieving a ' whitewashing ' equally far from the truth.
But in the few cases where we can check the account of Lucian,
it is obvious how distorted a picture he presents. For example,
Lucian insinuates that Theagenes, despite his profession of
poverty, has a hoard of 15 talents hidden away at Patrae ; but
the unimpeachable authority of Galen 3 shows him at the end
of his life living in the most stringent austerity, * in a wretched
hut . . . without wife or child or attendant '. Again, Lucian
tells us nothing of Peregrinus' teaching, but infers that it was
a mere empty display of gross dvaideia. Aulus Gellius, who
was for a time a pupil of his, speaks of him as * virum graven
atque constantem ', and testifies to the value of his teachings.
But though one must always suspect Lucian's imputation of

1 The example usually quoted, that of Lucian's treatment of
Alexander of Abonuteichos, is not very striking ; for when all allow-
ances are made, it is doubtful whether any apologetic can make a
case for Alexander as an apostle of the Higher Thought. Far more
significant is what Lucian, in this same work, has to say about the
Christians. ' They still worship the man who was crucified in
Palestine, on the grounds that he introduced a new mystic religion
(re^errf) into life. . . . The poor wretches have persuaded them-
selves that they are immortal and will live for ever, which is why
they despise death, and in some cases willingly yield themselves up.
Their founder has also persuaded them they are brethren of one
another. ... So that if any charlatan comes among them, some
clever man who knows the way of the world, he can soon make money
and laugh at the poor fools * ( 12, 13).

2 Lucian, und die Kyniker.

^Method, med. 13, 15 ; cf. Bernays, op. cit., p. 14 ff.

172 A HISTORY OF CYNICISM

motives, somewhat more reliance can be placed in his mere
statement of facts. After all, the story of Peregrinus' self-
immolation at Olympia would be almost incredible but for the
evidence of Lucian, who himself witnessed it. Since Lucian
says that it was then the fourth Olympic festival he had attended,
he may well have been present at the two previous festivals at
which Peregrinus achieved notoriety. It is therefore a fair
assumption that the main outlines of Peregrinus' career as
given by Lucian are trustworthy.

Life. Since Peregrinus committed suicide at the Olympic
festival of 167 *, and was then an old man, he must have been
born in the closing years of the first century. His native city
was Parium on the Propontis, and his father was evidently
one of the more prosperous members of that not very flourishing
community. 2 His father was esteemed by the city, and Pere-
grinus was under suspicion of having killed him because he
was an intolerable nuisance in his old age. This charge is
mentioned as one that would be familiar to those listening to
the invective against Peregrinus ; whatever its truth, Pere-
grinus went into voluntary exile. During his wanderings he
came into contact with the Christian community in Palestine,
amongst whom he quickly rose to a position of authority. 3

Connexion with the Christians. ' Some of their books he
expounded and interpreted ; many others he wrote himself,
so that they honoured him as a god, used him as a lawgiver,
and enrolled him as a patron/ 4 His works as a Christian
apologist are cited in a third-century catalogue from Memphis ;
Volke's theory, that he was responsible for the six Epistles from
Asia, ascribed to Ignatius, has not commanded general accept-
ance. 5 His position as leader of the Christian community
brought him into contact with the Roman authority, 6 and he

1 Nissen, Rh. AT, 1888.

2 He is said to have left a fortune of 30 talents. According to
Lucian, the total wealth of Parium together with five neighbouring
cities would not have amounted to 5,000 talents.

3 According to Lucian, he became nQoyrjTrjs xai OiaadQ%r)s xai
^vvaycoyeix; KO.I navra. /udvot; avrdq &>v.

4 n.

6 Die Apost. Vat. neu. untersuch, Vol. 2, 10. 2,.

6 Ueberweg (Gesch. der, Phil., Vol. i, p. 512) conjectures that this
must have been ' infolge eines besonders herausfordernden Verhaltens
(cine allgemeine Christen Verfolgung kommt bei der freien Bewegung

CYNICISM IN THE SECOND CENTURY A.D. 173

suffered a term of imprisonment. During his imprisonment
the Christians lavished such attention on him that Lucian's
ridicule is aroused.

Old women and orphans would hang about the prison all day long ;
the leaders of the community bribed the gaolers to let them in to
sleep with him. Elegant meals were carried in, the sacred writings
were read, and the good Peregrinus for such was the title he still
bore was proclaimed as the new Socrates. ... It really is extra-
ordinary to what trouble this sect will go about any matter that
affects their common interests.

The importance of Peregrinus is proved by the fact that the
Christian communities in Asia sent deputations and loyal
advice. He expected and perhaps desired martyrdom, but the
governor of Palestine, * a man given to philosophy ', released
him from prison.

After his release Peregrinus adopted the Cynic garb, and,
thus attired, returned to his native city. He gave the residue
of his father's property to the state ; an action which Lucian
represents as a clever move to quash proceedings being taken
against him for his father's murder. But of course renuncia-
tion of property was the approved Cynic practice, and had the
authority of Crates. That Peregrinus claimed to be following
his example is to be inferred from the fact that he was hailed
by his fellow-citizens as * the true disciple of Diogenes and
Crates '. Once more he resumed his wanderings and Lucian
suggests that he did not follow the Cynic poverty, for he was
supplied lavishly with all necessities by the Christians. His
connexion with the Christian community lasted for some time
longer, and it is interesting to find Peregrinus in the garb of
a Cynic professing the Christian faith. 1 But eventually
Peregrinus offended the Christians in some way, and was
expelled from their community.

Cynics and Christians. This episode in Peregrinus' life is

der iibrigen Gemeindeglieder nicht in Frage) '. Lucian definitely
says that he was imprisoned because of his profession of Christianity
(Inl rovrco ovMrjyOeis). It was a frequent practice of the authorities
to arrest the leaders of Christian communities, probably as sureties.
1 At about the same time Justin was teaching Christianity ' in the
garb of a philosopher * ; a further proof of Augustine's statement
that the Church forced men to change their beliefs, but not their
dress.

174 A HISTORY OF CYNICISM

of especial interest as being the earliest and best authenticated
example of connexion between the Cynics and the Christians.
A priori there are obvious grounds of sympathy between the
movements ; the Jews, the Cynics, and the Christians were
alike hostile to the general standards of Graeco- Roman civiliza-
tion. The sympathy of outlook is commented upon by Aelius
Aristides, who says that the Cynics

resemble the impious sect in Palestine in their customs. For with
the latter a mark of their impiety is that they do not reverence the
gods ; and so do these philosophers in like manner cut themselves
off from the Greeks, and, indeed, from all divine authority. 1

Aristides, it is to be noticed, speaks of a resemblance and not
of a connexion, but the career of Peregrinus is not the only
evidence of the relations between the two movements. The
ascetic sect of the ' Encratites ' were undoubtedly influenced
by the Cynics, as their name suggests ; and Hippolytus calls
them * more Cynic than Christian '. Their leader Tatian was
a contemporary of Peregrinus and quotes his writings, and the
Cynic philosopher Crescens, though responsible for the martyr-
dom of Tatian 's disciple Justin, was evidently in close touch
with the Christians, for Justin says of him that he found it
necessary to * avoid the suspicion of being himself a Chris-
tian J . 2 It is also noteworthy that Theagenes, reviewing the
claims of Peregrinus to fame, 3 mentions his imprisonment in
Syria, which implies that the Christian connexion was not
deprecated by the Cynics themselves. Later, of course, the
connexion was to become still closer, and we get such phen-
omena as the Cynic Maximus being Christian Bishop of Con-
stantinople. The influence of the Cynics on the monastic
orders and on the Egyptian eremites was probably consider-
able, though it is hard to trace ; and the Church's toleration
of Cynicism is seen not only from Augustine but from the fact
that there were Cynics in Byzantium.

After his expulsion from the Christian community Pere-
grinus returned to Parium, and tried to get an Imperial order
to recover the legacy he had given to the city. His enemies
naturally said that he wished to recover the money for his own
use ; Bernays suggests that he might have found that it was

1 Vol. 2, p. 402, Dindorf cf. Bernays, op. cit., p. 100 f.

2 Apol., 2. 3 De mort. Per., 4.

CYNICISM IN THE SECOND CENTURY A.D. 175

being spent in a way of which he disapproved. Whatever the
truth of the matter may have been, his appeal was rejected on
the grounds that the gift had been entirely voluntary. On two
occasions, then, Peregrinus had come in contact with the
imperial authority to his own disadvantage, and a sense of
personal grievance may well have been a contributary cause
of the anti-Roman feeling which he showed at a later stage of
his career. But one may suspect that an even more important
influence in this direction was that under which he next came.
* In his third wandering abroad ', says Lucian, * he came to
Egypt to study with Agathoboulos, whence he derived that
wonderful rationale of his.'

Agathoboulos is to us little more than a name, but there
is evidence that he was a person of importance in his
own day. Eusebius names him with Plutarch, Sextus, and
Oenomaus as the most notable philosophers flourishing about
A.D. 1 20 ; 1 and that he was one of the most prominent Cynics
is to be inferred from the fact that he * taught ' both Demonax *
and Peregrinus. Nothing more can be said about his life
except that it extended beyond A.D. 155, the date of Peregrinus'
visit. 3 He practised Cynicism in its most ascetic form, laying
particular stress on its squalor, 4 on the public exhibition of

1 Vide p. 184, n. 3. * Vide Dem., i.

8 Perhaps he came from Rhodes, and was the * famous Rhodian *
from whom Demetrius of Sunium learned the Cynic philosophy (see
Lucian, Toxaris). I agree with Zeller that Demetrius of Sunium
can hardly be identical with the famous Cynic of the first century
A.D. Zeller's reason for doubt on this point is the uncertainty of
the Toxaris belonging to the Lucianic corpus. More recently the
editors of Lucian have been inclined to regard it as genuine, but
there are other reasons for doubt about Demetrius of Sunium. The
name Demetrius is a particularly common one, nearly one hundred
persons of that name are listed in Pauly-Wissowa. Moreover, we
nowhere hear of the first-century Demetrius as going to Egypt, still
less to India, as Demetrius of Sunium is said to have done. Con-
nexion with the Brachmani of India was a feature of the Cynicism
of Peregrinus and Theagenes ; if Demetrius of Sunium was a pupil
of Agathoboulos, he may well have been their link with the Eastern
sages. We know of no * famous * Cynic, Rhodian or otherwise, from
whom the first-century Demetrius could have learned the philosophy.
The most satisfactory inference is that Demetrius of Sunium is not
the same person as the friend of Seneca, but lived considerably later
and was the pupil of Agathoboulos.

v, Luc., vit. Per. t 17.

176 A HISTORY OF CYNICISM

dvaideia and of the endurance of pain. 1 These austerities,
however, were not the sole activity of the Cynics of Alexandria.
In the Oration to the Alexandrians Dio Chrysostom 2 speaks
of them as being a bad influence on the populace, and suggests
that their speeches inflamed the excitable temper of the city
mob and so helped to cause the frequent riots which broke
out in Alexandria, a notable example of which had occurred
just before his visit in A.D. 105. Rostovtseff 3 gives the best
explanation of the peculiar turbulence of Alexandrian politics
throughout the early Empire ; according to him, the usual
social struggle between rich and poor was complicated by an
anti- Roman feeling, and since the Roman government sup-
ported the richer classes, the outbreaks of the city mob, though
they might take the form of Jewish pogroms, were really
demonstrations against the Roman authority. Nor is docu-
mentary evidence lacking to show that the Cynics encouraged
the anti- Roman feeling of the Alexandrian lower classes.
That curious document known as the ' Acts of the Heathen
Martyrs ', though a compilation of the age of Commodus,
contains, according to Rostovtseff, much material of an earlier
date. He points out how its whole tone is anti- Roman, and
also how Cynic influence is to be seen in the denunciation of
tyrants. Now immediately after his stay with Agathoboulos
Peregrinus went to Rome and began to abuse the Emperor,
and afterwards stirred up anti-Roman feeling to the point of
armed rebellion in Achaea. All indications point in the same
direction that Agathoboulos was the most prominent of these
Alexandrian Cynics who throughout the second century were
notorious for their anti-Roman attitude and for their influence
on the city mob. 4

After his stay in Egypt Peregrinus sailed for Italy.
* Straight off the boat ', says Lucian, 5 * he began a campaign
of invective, especially against the Emperor, whom he knew
to be most mild and forbearing.' This hostile voice in the
reign of the almost universally beloved Antoninus must have

1 For r6 dvexrlxov as a Cynic duty, cf. Epict., iii. 22. 100.

* D.C., Or. 33 (657 R).

8 Social and Economic History of the Roman Empire, s.v. Alexandria.

4 A revolt broke out in Egypt shortly before the visit of Peregrinus,
probably in 153. But since it was in Upper Egypt it is hardly likely
that the Cynics of Alexandria can have been directly involved.

6 18.

CYNICISM IN THE SECOND CENTURY A.D. 177

attracted attention, but there were no great nobles of Republican
leanings to make Peregrinus their philosophic model, and the
policy of the Emperor was not to punish any one who wore
the garb of a philosopher. According to Lucian, Peregrinus
gained a following sv TO it; IdiAraiq^ by which he must mean
the lower classes. And it was probably while in Rome that
he came in contact with Theagenes, who appears as his chief
disciple at the final immolation. Eventually his abuse became
too excessive to be tolerated, and he was expelled by the City
Prefect on the grounds that ' Rome did not need a philosopher
of that kind '. His followers immediately compared him with
Musonius, Dio and Epictetus, philosophers who had also paid
the penalty of freedom of speech. In the speech of Theagenes
the expulsion from Rome is mentioned together with the im-
prisonment in Syria as the most notable persecutions Pere-
grinus had endured in the name of philosophy ; and it was
clearly in something of an atmosphere of martyrdom that he
left Italy for Greece.

Since one of his first activities in Greece was to * abuse
the Elians ', it is to be conjectured that he went there to
attend the Olympic games of 159 B.C. Probably the Elians
were abused as harbouring the games, an attitude which
would be consistent with the Cynic hostility to athletes. But
of course the great festivals themselves were useful for the
Cynics in that they provided the greatest publicity attainable
in the Greek world, as we see from the stories of Diogenes
at the Isthmian games, in Dio Chrysostom's eighth and ninth
orations. Whether the * armed insurrection against the
Romans ' which Peregrinus provoked was before or after the
Olympic festival cannot be determined ; the Vita Antonini
Pit * alludes to * rebelliones in Achaia atque Aegypto ', with-
out indicating any dates. The reference to Peregrinus is
therefore our only authority for supposing that the rebellion
in Greece took place later than that in Egypt. At the Olympic
games Peregrinus abused the millionaire and philanthropist
Herodes Atticus for his benefactions to Greece, and especially
for bringing water to Olympia : * He was turning the Greeks
into women/ was the Cynic's comment. The infuriated crowd
attacked and stoned Peregrinus, so that he was forced to take
refuge at the altar of Zeus.

*c. 5.
13

t?8 A HISTORY OF CYNICISM

His teaching. The last eight years of his life Peregrinus
probably spent in Greece ; he seems to have attracted numerous
disciples. Aulus Gellius l tells how he frequently visited him
in a hut outside Athens, and * heard him say many useful and
noble things '. He was, Gellius says, a dignified and earnest
man [virum gravem atque constantem] ; but he tells us little
of his teaching beyond the insistence, made in the spirit of
Socrates, that the good man will not sin even if he can be
sure of escaping the observation of gods and men. From
Tatian we know how he said that not even the avragHeta of
the Cynic could be absolute, * for he has need of services of
the leather-cutter for his wallet, the woodcutter for his staff,
and the weaver for his cloak '. Scanty as these indications are,
Bernays is right in emphasizing them as a contrast to the
evidence of Lucian, from whose pages it is hard to view Pere-
grinus as anything but a charlatan. He seems to have main-
tained the asceticism of Agathoboulos, to judge from the story
of an attempt to rebuke the less austere Demonax. * Demonax,'
said he, * you do not play the part of a Cynic.* * Peregrinus/
came the retort, * you do not play the part of a human being/ 2
But the difference between Peregrinus and Demonax was more
than one of different levels of asceticism. Demonax and
Oenomaus represent in the second century the sceptical,
nihilistic side of Cynicism : while it is obvious that mysticism
played an important part on the system of Peregrinus. Unfor-
tunately, the references of Lucian are not sufficiently detailed
to afford a coherent picture of this side of his teaching, but
indications point to such a blend of Hellenic religion, Oriental
mysticism, and neo-Pythagoreanism as we find in Apollonius
of Tyana. 3 Peregrinus claims to hear the commands of Zeus
in dreams : he is careful to avoid polluting the sacred pre-
cincts : after his death he is to be worshipped as a hero together
with Heracles and Hephaestus. His suicide by fire was to
be an example of endurance like that of the Brachmami. 4
One recalls the sympathy of the Cynics for the ' Gymnoso-

1 Noct. Att., 8. 3. 2 Vit. Dem., zi.

8 See Note 4 to Chap. VIII.

4 Bernays observes that such a manner of death was rare among
the ancients, despite the frequency with which they committed
suicide. Its rarity is the only excuse that can be found for Lucian *s
remark that it is practically painless.

CYNICISM IN THE SECOND CENTURY A.D. 179

phists ' of India, already seen in Onesicratus and in the Berlin
Pap., No. 13044 ; one of these sages had actually appeared at
Athens during the reign of Augustus, where he publicly burned
himself to death * in accordance with ancestral custom '.
During the time of the Roman Empire, as to-day, the ' wise
men of the East ' exercised that curious fascination they have
always had over a certain type of Western mind ; the picture
they present in Philostratus is very like many a modern attempt
to portray them as the guardians of esoteric wisdom. The
influence of neo-Pythagoreanism on Peregrinus can be seen
in certain ritualistic details of his suicide 1 ; a blending of
Cynic and neo-Pythagorean ideas is to be seen in the Pinax
of Cebes.

At the Olympic games of 163 Peregrinus delivered a
speech (which Lucian maliciously says had taken him four
years to compose) apologizing for his attack on Herodes
Atticus, and ' explaining ' his flight to the temple of Zeus.
The explanation he may have felt to be necessary because
a Cynic was supposed to endure stoning and flogging : per-
haps Peregrinus justified himself on the plea that it was
in the interests of mankind that he should meet death in
another fashion. At all events, shortly after this festival was
over he issued his famous proclamation announcing his inten-
tion of publicly burning himself to death at the next. Now
it is clear that Peregrinus had a great following among the
Cynics, and was probably regarded by them as in some sense
the leader of the sect. The oracles circulated just before his
death call him * the best of all the Cynics ' 2 ; and we are told
that Theagenes did not think Diogenes fit to compare with
Peregrinus. In view of the great reverence usually expressed
for the founder of the sect, this is of some significance. There
was, of course, always a tendency to find the ideal aoyos
incarnate in the person of a contemporary, as was done
by admirers of Demetrius and Demonax. But the case of
Peregrinus seems an attempt to increase the influence of Cyni-
cism by providing it with a cult ; the Cynic <pdavOQconia is
to be exercised by Peregrinus even after death, and he will

1 The ceremony took place at moonrise : Peregrinus was clad in
a white linen robe ; he turned to the south before leaping into the
flames, &c.

2 29.

i8o A HISTORY OF CYNICISM

become ' a guardian spirit of the night ', the associate of the
great benefactors of mankind, Hephaestus and Heracles. The
foundation of a cult was of course not without precedent in
the second century, as we know from the popularity of the
worship of Antinous. Sceptics like Lucian professed to find
no other motive for Peregrinus' action than vainglory ; he
compares Peregrinus with an obscure individual from Ephesus,
who could find no other road to fame than burning down the
temple of Diana. The comparison is obviously unjust, and
in point of fact Lucian does allow Peregrinus' own version of
his motives to appear. * During the last portion of his life ',
we are told, * Peregrinus wished to be called Phoenix, after
the Indian bird which burns itself to death in advanced old
age.' To commit suicide in old age was of course the accepted
Cynic practice; the peculiarity of Peregrinus' death was the
form it took, which is explained by the few words Lucian
allows to him to say for himself.

He said that he wished to put a golden finial to a golden life.
For he, who had lived like Heracles, must die like Heracles, and
commingle with the aether. And I wish, said he, to help mankind
by showing them how to despise death. For all men must be the
Philoctetes to my Heracles. 1

The passage is a good example of the blend of Cynicism and
neo-Pythagoreanism characteristic of Peregrinus. To live like
Heracles was the aim of every Cynic. Why should not emula-
tion be extended to the manner of his death ? The Cynic's
duty was to set mankind an example in enduring pain and
despising death ; this end also would be served by the pro-
posed self-immolation. Moreover, according to neo-Pytha-
gorean belief, the burning by fire would purify the soul till
it commingled with the aether, a condition necessary for
immortality. 2 Perhaps, as has been recently suggested, 3 a
further consideration which led Peregrinus to adopt this form
of suicide may have been a desire to emulate the Christian
martyrs particularly Polycarp whose fortitude in meeting
death had been attracting much attention.

The four years' interval between the Olympic festivals had
enabled news of Peregrinus' intention to be circulated through-

1 27, 28. 2 See Note 4 to Chap. VIII.

8 See Note 4 to Chap. VIII.

CYNICISM IN THE SECOND CENTURY A.D. 181

out the Graeco-Roman world. How much interest he had
attracted can be read through Lucian's description. He was
followed by great crowds, not only of Cynics but of the general
public ; the crowd greeted him with shouts of ad)ov "EUrjcnv,
' Save yourself for the Greeks ! ' ; an expression of scepticism
was apt to provoke a brawl. The immolation took place on
the last night of the festival, at Harpina, some 20 stades
distant from Olympia, in order to avoid pollution of the holy
place. The final scene is best read in the pages of Lucian,
together with the latter's demonstration of how easily a legend
may be started.

But perhaps the most interesting feature of this extra-
ordinary story is its sequel.

To almost all the principal cities [says Lucian] 1 Peregrinus had
despatched letters in the form of testaments (diaOrjxa*;), exhortations,
and codes (v6/j,ov$). Several of his companions he chose as ambas-
sadors for this purpose, with the titles of Messengers and Couriers
of the Dead.

This was of course in keeping with the Cynic's profession to
be the messenger of God and the schoolmaster of mankind.
What of the cult ? Lucian's remark that ' there is nothing
odd if some of the many fools abroad should claim to have
been relieved of quartan fevers through his agency ' is recog-
nized by Bernays as a * prophecy after the event ' ; and we
know from Athenagoras 2 that at some date earlier than 180
there was a statue of Peregrinus in the agora of his native city
Parium, which was credited with prophetic powers. If we
interpret other and similar remarks of Lucian in the same
way, it seems that statues were also set up at Elis and else-
where, and that on the site of the pyre near Olympia there
was a regular oracular shrine, with all the machinery of priests,
mystic rites, and inmost sanctuary. Lucian expects that his
friend Cronius will meet many who regard Peregrinus with
awe : and apparently some one, whether devotee or collector,
was found to pay a talent for the staff which he was holding
before he sprang into the flames. 3 There, so far as antiquity
goes, the curious story ends for we do not know how long
the cult of Peregrinus lasted. There is one later incident
which may be mentioned, since it is oddly in keeping with

1 41. 2 Supp. pro Christ., 26. 8 Lucian, adv. ind., 14.

182 A HISTORY OF CYNICISM

the rest that in the seventeenth century Lucian 's book On
the Death of Peregrinus was placed on the Index Librorum
prohibitorum. 1

(/) Sostratus. Sostratus, the paragon of physical prowess,
mentioned at the beginning of the Life of Demonax, is probably
to be numbered among the Cynics of the time. 2 His nickname
of * Heracles ', perhaps originally given to him on account of
his physique, he proceeded to justify by emulating the hero
and Cynic patron saint in his * labours on behalf of mankind '.
Sostratus seems to have been a ' strong man J of the type that
from time to time becomes the wonder of a countryside. He
was about eight feet high, was well made, and had an appetite
proportionate to his size, though his diet was restricted to
barley and milk. He was born in Boeotia, and spent his life
in the country districts of Boeotia and Attica, sometimes living
on Mount Parnes, at others wandering about, maintained by
the farmers, who called him ' Goodfellow ' and thought he
brought them luck. It was natural that a certain amount of
superstition should spring up around him : according to
Lucian, some of the Greeks actually thought that he was a
reincarnation of Heracles, while Philostratus says that he him-
self claimed to be the son of the rustic hero Marathon. He
used to wear the skins of wolves 3 and after the pattern of
Heracles ' slew wild beasts and robbers, made highways in
deserted country, and built bridges over impassable places '.
These exploits doubtless increased the regard which was felt
for him by the country people ; and archaic though they
sound, were probably by no means superfluous in the Greece
of the second century A.D. The fall in the population and the
decay of agriculture which characterized the period in Greece
must have led to many roads and bridges falling into disuse
and disrepair : there would also be an increase in the number
of wild animals : as for brigands, Dio Chrysostom mentions
them as one of the dangers to be feared by the little city in
Euboea, not very far from the district of Sostratus. There
is therefore nothing impossible about the exploits of Sostratus ;
indeed, it could be claimed for him that here was a man who
led the * Life of Heracles * in simple fact and not in allegory.

1 Bernays, op. cit., p. 87 f. 2 See Note 5 to Chap. VIII.

3 Cf. the Cynic Honoratus, whose garb was a bear-skin. Lucian,
Demon., c. 19.

CYNICISM IN THE SECOND CENTURY A.D. 183

But the probability that this rustic prodigy is to be numbered
among the Cynics of the second century is but another indi-
cation of how little Cynicism at that period necessarily had
to do with anything that we should recognize as philosophy.
Theagenes. Lucian only mentions by name one of the
numerous followers of Peregrinus Theagenes, whom he casts
as devreQaya)viarrj<; in the farce of Peregrinus' death. Thea-
genes is also the only one of whom we hear anything further
and that because he figured in Galen's case-book (Galen, de
method rned., 10). After the death of Peregrinus, Theagenes
went to Rome, where he taught daily in the Forum of Trajan,
and became a familiar figure in the city. He was celibate,
and lived in the utmost frugality, without any attendant, and
in a humble house. Finally he contracted fever, and suc-
cumbed as a victim to medical experiment. His doctor was
Attalus the * Thessalian ', Galen's opponent, and Galen de-
scribes with true medical gusto how the patient died under his
rival's treatment. With the death of Theagenes our know-
ledge of an epoch of Cynicism comes to an end. The sect
itself undoubtedly continued, but apart from a single reference
to Antiochus, who lived in the reign of Septimus Severus,
nothing more is known of the Cynics till the reign of Julian. 1

NOTES TO CHAPTER VIII

i . Von Arnim 2 shows the use made of Cynic material in the sixth
oration, which he believes to have been compiled from four different
sources, (a) a description of the way of life of Diogenes, (b) a collection

1 The other Cynics named in the literature of the period demand
only brief notice. With the Didymus Planetiades of Plutarch, as
with the Alcidamas of Lucian's * Banquet ', it is uncertain whether
one is dealing with a real person or a fictitious character. Athenaeus
(Deipnos y 1550) mentions a Cynics' Symposium written by one Par-
meniscus, which appears to have resembled Meleager's * Contest of
Thick and Clear soup '. Lentil soup followed lentil soup through-
out the courses, and the Cynics present discussed with a gourmet's
appreciation the flavour of water in various localities. One of the
characters was a * Carneius of Megara, ' who may be the same as the
* Carneades ' mentioned by Eunapius (454) as a * famous Cynic '. If
so, then Carneius, Cebes of Cyzicus and the rest, must have belonged
to the first century A.D., for Eunapius speaks of Carneades as the con-
temporary of Demetrius andMusonius. Athenaeus also mentions an
Art of Love written by a Cynic called Sphodrias (Deipnos, ibzb).

2 op. cit., p. 263.

184 A HISTORY OF CYNICISM

of %Qelai and dnocpOtyuaTa attributed to Diogenes, (c) a Cynic dia-
tribe on the animals as examples of the * natural ' life, (d) another,
later diatribe on the miseries of tyrants.

2. Though the Cynic stress on avraQxeia is apparent throughout
the passage, there is no trace of their traditional avaideia and the de-
scription of the family lives of the shepherds is rather in the spirit
of Musonius. Musonius, too, was an advocate of the farmer's life
as suitable for the ao<p6<;.

3. Suidas 1 says that he was not much older than Porphyry, which
would give a floruit in the first half of the third century A.D. Hier-
onymus, 2 however, says that in the year 120 ' Plutarch of Chaeronea,
Sextus, Agathoboulos, and Oenomaus were well-known philosophers '.
Rohde 3 prefers to rely on Suidas, finding support from Eusebius'
reference to Oenomaus as * a recent author ' (TIQ TWV vecov). But
Vallette * shows that Eusebius 1 statement is too vague to be admitted
as evidence, also that Eusebius himself elsewhere says that Oenomaus,
Sextus and Agathoboulos flourished * in the year when Plutarch was
procurator in Achaea ', i.e. A.D. 120. Vallette thinks that Oenomaus
is placed c a little before Porphyry ' by Suidas because Porphyry
resisted his attacks on religion. But, he says, this could easily happen
if Oenomaus lived a century or more earlier than Porphyry ; indeed,
we know from Julian that as late as the fourth century Oenomaus
was considered one of the most notorious opponents of Greek religion.
The authority of Hieronymus is therefore to be preferred, and one
may with some confidence place the floruit of Oenomaus in the reign
of Hadrian. Moreover, such a date best fits the famous attack on
oracles contained in the yoryrcov (pa>Qa. As is well known, shortly
after Plutarch wrote On the Cessation of Oracles a revival of oracles
occurred, and the shrines of Colophon, Branchidae, and Amphilochus
in particular enjoyed great prestige. Amphilochus and Colophon
are both mentioned by Oenomaus ; and his book falls naturally into
place as a contribution to a discussion of the value of oracles, together
with the Alexander and Zeus Elenchomenos of Lucian, the De super-
stitione of Plutarch and the XlXth Dissertation of Maximus of Tyre.

4. H. M. Hornsby's article on * The Cynicism of Peregrinus Proteus J
(Hermathena, 1934) examines three theories that would account for
the strain of mysticism found in Peregrinus and his followers, (a)
that such a strain was present in Cynicism from the beginning, and
could be traced to the influence of Antisthenes, (b) that the Cynicism
of Peregrinus was tinged with Neo-Pythagoreanism, (c) that by the
middle of the second century Cynicism had come to terms with the
general superstition of the age. (c) is regarded as the true explana-
tion ; and I agree that such terms were made by Peregrinus and his

1 Vide sub 'Oivoudos. a d. 2135. 3 Rh. M.> xxxiii., p. 165.
* De Oenomao Cynico (Paris These, 1908) ; much the best thing
on Oenomaus, which supersedes earlier dissertations.

CYNICISM IN THE SECOND CENTURY A.D. 185

followers. But the sceptical strain represented by Demonax and
Oenomaus must not be forgotten, and indeed she admits that there
was considerable divergence of belief amongst the Cynics of the
period. There seems no reason why theories (b) and (c) should be
mutually exclusive ; the rejection of any connexion between the
Cynics and Pythagoreans fails to take any account of the Pinax of
Cebes.

5. Funk l was the first to point out that the * Sostratus-Heracles ' of
Lucian was the same person as the * Agathion-Heracles * of Philo-
stratus. 2 The identification is incontestable : date, place, and de-
scription agree : and the objection that Philostratus calls him * Aga-
thion ' instead of Sostratus is removed by the consideration that
* Agathion ' appears to have been simply another nickname, given
to him by the farmers of Boeotia and Attica. The description of
Philostratus is quoted from a letter of Herodes Atticus, who had some
association, apparently a brief one, with Sostratus himself.

1 PhiL SuppL, 10, 1907. 2 Vit. Soph., 47.

CHAPTER IX

CYNICISM AND THE PHILOSOPHIC SCHOOLS
IN THE FIRST AND SECOND CENTURIES A.D.

(a) DURING the second and first centuries B.C., as we have seen,
Cynicism was of little importance ; both Epicureanism and
the Middle Stoa, the dominant systems of the period, were
hostile, while with the New Academy, preoccupied with dialec-
tic, it had no point of contact. But about the time of the
Cynic revival, early in the first century A.D., Cynicism once
more influenced a philosophical system of some importance.
The system in question was that of Philo, whose blending
of Greek, Jewish, and Oriental thought was so characteristic
a product of the intellectual atmosphere of his native Alex-
andria. Wendland l was the first to point out the parallels
between numerous passages in Philo and Musonius, and to
argue that they must have had a common origin in Cynic-
Stoic diatribe. Philosophy for Philo meant primarily Stoi-
cism, and the Cynic ingredients of the older Stoicism reappear
in his ethics, as do the standard themes and figures of the
popular preaching which was common to Stoic and Cynic
alike. But so far as is known, the influence of Cynicism on
Philo was purely historical and literary ; he seems to have
had no personal relations with contemporary Cynics, of whom
he speaks with contempt and disgust. Brehier 2 has shown
the part played by Cynic ideas in Philo 's moral system and
in his views of &axri<ri$. Virtue is the supreme Good for
man ; rjdovr} the great enemy which hinders him in attaining
it. Unremitting novoq is essential if Virtue is to be attained ; 3
to God alone belongs the faculty of possessing the Good with-
out novo<;. The ability of the soul to endure and even wel-
come the hardships inseparable from n6voq are due to the
mystic love of the soul for God. Philo's view of

1 Philo und die Kynische-Stoische diatribe.
* Les idtes morale et religieuse de Philon. 3 De fug. et. invid.

1 86

IN THE FIRST AND SECOND CENTURIES A.D. 187

which must exercise every part of the body and mind to aid
in the struggle for Virtue, recalls the educational theory which
we have seen reason to attribute to Diogenes. The Cynic
origin of these ideas is obvious, as are the additions made
by Philo himself. As Brehier says, a sharp distinction must
be drawn between the ideas proper to Cynicism and the
mysticism which Philo imposed upon them. He was using
borrowed material for purposes of his own as openly as when
he took the old allegory of * The Choice of Heracles ' and
adapted it to the story of Cain and Abel.

The influence of Cynicism on Philo is an isolated phenom-
enon ; there was no sequel or reaction, and to an essay
dealing with the history of Cynicism Philo is a cul-de-sac.
None the less the digression is worth making because it shows
the ideas of Cynicism incorporated in a fully developed system
of philosophy an achievement already noted in the case of
Zeno, but one beyond either the interest or the intellect of
the Cynics themselves.

(b) Stoicism. It has already been shown that the evidence for
the independent survival of Cynicism discredits the view that
the Cynic revival of the first century A.D. was a rebirth of
Cynicism out of Stoicism. But the attention paid to Cynics
by the literature of the period, as compared with their obscur-
ity in that of the previous century, was largely due to the
renewed interest of Stoicism in its poor relation. The develop-
ment of Roman Stoicism from its Republican representatives
to those of the age of Nero is a subject which lies beyond the
scope of this essay. In any case, the facts are familiar, and
may be thus briefly summarized. Stoicism rapidly advanced
in popularity at the expense of its rivals, until it almost monop-
olized what attention was devoted to philosophy at Rome.
The qualification is necessary, for the commercial classes, and
people in country districts a large section of Rome and Italy
remained untouched by philosophy. 1 But the street
preachers whom we meet in the pages of Horace 2 carried on
their propaganda amongst the poor of the cities in increasing
numbers ; while what may be called * official Stoicism ', repre-
sented by such men as Attalus, Musonius Rufus, and Epic-
tetus drew most of its adherents, as formerly, from the Roman

1 Trimalchio in this respect stands for his class.

2 See above, p. 120.

x88 A HISTORY OF CYNICISM

aristocracy. The matter of the street preachers' diatribes,
composed of a few familiar precepts and standardized anec-
dotes, varied little with the new age, but official Stoicism
altered to meet the new demands of its patrons. The Stoi-
cism which first took root in Rome was that of Panaetius
and Posidonius ; a liberal, relatively speculative creed well
suited to the tastes of the great nobles of the Scipionic circle,
devotees of the new Greek learning and as yet political masters
of the Roman world. But for Cato and his friends Stoicism
played that role of consoler to a losing cause with which it
became so familiar in the next century. Under the Empire
the Roman nobility's long misgovernment of the world came
to an end ; the policy of the Emperors to the aristocracy as
a class was to conciliate it, so long as it combined dignity with
impotence, but above all to keep it firmly in check. At best,
then, the Roman noble who remembered the ruling traditions
of his class had to practise resignation ; at worst, he must face
sudden changes of fortune, exile, possibly death. 1 On their
behalf, Philosophy was recalled from even that mild indul-
gence in speculation which had been hers for the last two
centuries, and reminded of her duties in regulating the lives
of men, and enabling them to take arms against a sea of
troubles. All the Stoic authors of the first century A.D. stress
the practical aspect of philosophy : * facere docet philosophia,
non dicere ' is the slogan.

The phenomenon is one which, as they might have said
themselves, ' does not need numerous proofs '. 2 Seneca quotes
with approval the dictum of Demetrius that it is much better
to know a few of the precepts of philosophy, providing they
are kept ready at hand and in constant use, than to have a
scholarly knowledge of many which are yet not readily avail-
able, and quotes his illustration from the wrestling ring.

As the good wrestler is not the man who knows every kind of grip
and hold, such as are seldom of use against an opponent, but rather
he who has patiently practised one or two holds and is ever on the

1 A long list of Roman Stoics were put to death or committed
suicide in the first century. Those under Nero and Domitian we
have already mentioned : to them may be added, under Tiberius,
Cremutius Cordus, under Gaius, Canus and Rectus, under Claudius,
Caecina Paetus, under Vespasian, Helvidius Priscus.

2 Cf. M.R., 8n ov del

IN THE FIRST AND SECOND CENTURIES A.D. 189

look-out for an opportunity to use them (for it does not matter
how much he knows, provided he knows enough to win) ; so in
the contests of philosophy, there are many things that bring delight,
but few that bring victory. 1

So Musonius 2 insists that virtue is not merely a theoretical
science, but a practical one, on a par with medicine and
music. Just as doctor or musician do not merely learn the
theory of their science, but train themselves in action accord-
ing to that theory, so must the man who is to be virtuous
not merely learn what studies are conducive to virtue, but
must also drill himself therein faithfully and assiduously.
How can a man straightway become temperate, if he only
knows that it is wrong to be mastered by pleasure, but is
not himself schooled to withstand it ? Or how just, knowing
that one must love fairness, but not being accustomed to
avoid selfishness ? (nXsove^ia). Cynicism in the past had
been called a * short cut to virtue ' ; its merit lay in that it
offered the spectacle of the Wise Man in action which above
all others commended itself to the Stoicism of the Empire.
The true Wise Man, says Seneca, appears on earth as seldom
as the phoenix, yet such was Demetrius * an outstanding figure,
even if compared with the greatest ', and worthy to rank with
Socrates, Diogenes, and Cato. He was sent to earth by
Providence, ' that our own age might not lack both example
and testimony \ 3 The same claim is advanced for Demonax
in the Life which goes under the name of Lucian, 4 and as
we shall see, the conception of the Cynic as the * messenger
of God ' is most fully developed in Epictetus.

The stress laid by the new Stoicism on ^e^ertf and aaKV]ai$
meant that their regimen approached the Cynic austerity. In
Seneca, the multi-millionaire and Imperial minister, this is
naturally not the case ; he is careful to tell us of his frugal
diet, but for the rest he * does not mind seeming too rich in
the eyes of those to whom Demetrius seems too poor J . But
the teachings of Musonius on diet and dress have the Cynic
ring. Diet should be vegetarian as far as possible, though
we cannot rival the frugality of the gods, who live on exhala-
tions. Water is sufficient drink ; and above all, gluttony
must be avoided because, unlike other pleas-

1 De Ben., vii. i. 3. 2 M.R., p. 22. 5 (Hense).

8 Sen., De Ben., vii. 8. 4 Luc., Dem., i.

190 A HISTORY OP CYNICISM

ures, it may be indulged twice or more every day. We should
go barefoot, and be accustomed to withstand heat and cold
in moderation which implies that Musonius did not approve
of the extreme forms of hardihood attributed to Diogenes.
As for dress, ' one cloak is better than two, and no cloak,
but a single garment (ijuarlov) better than one '. A natural
cave which gave adequate shelter would really be the best
type of house ; but since these are scarce, we must look for
the simplest available house, and furnish it as sparsely as
possible. Since novos is essential to the philosopher, the life
best fitted for him is that on the land, whether as farmer or
labourer. 1 Parallels between these passages and the pseudo-
Lucianic dialogue, The Cynic, are quoted in Hense's edition
of Musonius. It is interesting to notice in these passages how
Musonius speaks of two levels of asceticism, of which the more
extreme is commendable, but is not for every one to follow.
The disciples of philosophy, he suggests elsewhere, need not

* exceed normal limitations ' (eufidiveiv to KOIVOV rwv noMa>v). 2

Sympathy for Cynicism is even more marked in Musonius'
pupil, Epictetus. This was only natural, for while Musonius
was of the equestrian order, a descendant of an old Etruscan
family with a long Roman tradition behind him, Epictetus was
of Asiatic birth, the slave of Nero's freedman Epaphroditus.
His sympathies, however, were not for the Cynics of his own
day, but for an ideal standard of which they fell far short.
Fortunately, there is no need to reconstruct this ideal from
scattered references, it is the subject of one of the best known
and most eloquent of the Discourses that entitled ' On the
calling of a Cynic '. 3 The essay is so familiar that a transla-
tion would be superfluous, and I will therefore confine myself
to an analysis of the ideas it contains.

The discussion arose out of the desire of a young man,
presumably one of Epictetus' pupils, 4 to embrace the Cynic
profession, and his inquiry, put to the Master, as to what

1 These details are from M.R. t fr. xviiiA and xviiiB, xix, and xx
(Hense). For a fuller treatment of Musonius, cf. M. P. Charlesworth,

* Five Men '.

2 M.R., p. 88. 9 (Hense). 3 Epict., iii. 22.

* lie is said to be rcov yvcoQ^icov n$, but the description of the
austerities to which he was already accustomed make it almost certain
that he was a pupil of Epictetus ( 9-11).

IN THE FIRST AND SECOND CENTURIES A.D. 191

sort of man the true Cynic should be. In reply, Epictetus'
first care is to warn the young man that he is entertaining a
project of the utmost seriousness, which cannot be embarked
upon without the help of God, since failure means public
disgrace. He then employs the familiar Stoic-Cynic figure
of the Household of the World : can we be sure that the
Lord of the Mansion has allotted to the young man the task
of a Cynic ? Let us look more closely and see what that
task really involves. The popular conception is utterly inade-
quate a man is a Cynic if he has a wallet and a staff and
big jaws, with which he gobbles up everything given to him,
or reviles tactlessly any one he meets. Such an impression
is certainly fostered by the present-day representatives of the
profession, * dogs of the table, guardians of the gate ', fol-
lowers of Diogenes in shamelessness alone. 1 Possibly the
young man thinks he will have to do little more than to main-
tain his present asceticism, and to take up the Cynic insignia
and lead the vagabond, begging life, rebuking the more obvious
forms of luxury, such as the use of depilatories, or the wearing
of gaudy clothes. If he conceives the matter in some such way
as that, he should give it a wide berth, it is not for him. But
if he has some impression of its true magnitude, and confi-
dence in himself, let him take a mirror, and look at his loins,
for he is entering for an Olympic contest. Like the athletes,
he will be called upon to enter on a long and arduous period
of training : only in his case the aim to be achieved is the
complete eradication of sensual desire, ambition, and emotion.
By these means alone can he acquire that sine qua non of
his calling a Guiding Principle that is absolutely pure. TO
fiyepovMov del Kadagov noifjacu Epictetus twice repeats the
phrase. His plan of life must be the following.

From now on my mind is to be my material, like timber to a car-
penter, or leather to a shoemaker ; and my work is to make the
right use of my impressions (d#0?) XQfjaie ra>v (pavraaicov). My
paltry body and its parts are nothing to me, as for Death let it come
when it will. . . . Exile ? Whither can I be thrust out, since I
cannot be thrust out of the Universe, and wherever I go there are
the sun, moon and stars, dreams and omens, and my converse with
the gods.

l 80.

192 A HISTORY OF CYNICISM

Perfected in this training, he will be able to understand
the true nature, and undertake the duties, of his profession.

He is sent as a messenger of God to mankind, to show them how
they have gone astray in questions of good and evil, and are seeking
the nature of the good where it is not, and know not where it is ;
he is furthermore a scout, sent like Diogenes to Philip after the
battle of Chaeronea. 1

These conceptions represent two complementary aspects of
the Cynic's mission ; in the first role he reports to mankind,
on the authority of God, that they are ignorant of the true
way of life ; in the second, he must himself penetrate more
deeply than other men into the realm of human experience,
as does a scout into enemy country, and bring back to his
fellows a true report of what lies ahead of them. There is
nothing new in these conceptions, and the religious tone is
characteristic of the age, though perhaps its fervour is Epic-
tetus' own. We then have a specimen of Cynic diatribe,
using Agamemnon as imaginary adversary to show the folly
of popular conceptions of the good. * Tell us, sir messenger
and scout, where lies the good, if not in these things ? ' is
humanity's natural demand. Now comes the central doctrine
of the Cynic evangelism that happiness, serenity, freedom
from restraint, can only be found within, since our will alone
is completely our own. * My mind to me a kingdom is ' is
the burthen of his teaching a kingdom that bears sway over
desire and revulsion, choice and refusal. Everything external
must be renounced ; but again comes the question : * How is
serenity possible for the man who has nothing, who is naked,
without home or hearth, living in squalor, without a slave or
a city, to live in serenity ? ' The Cynic * non praeceptor veri
sed testis ' must be able to supply the answer by practical
example, to show that he fulfils all these qualifications. ' Yet
he is free from pain and fear, gets what he desires, avoids
what he does not, blames neither God nor man. . . . Such
are the words that befit a Cynic, such his character and way
of life.' Epictetus also uses the familiar figures of the Cynic
as Schoolmaster, the xowog naidevrijs of the world, and as
King, whose staff is his sceptre, and whose kingly appearance
forces all to acknowledge his mastery.

1 23-5-

IN THE FIRST AND SECOND CENTURIES A.D. 193

Cynicism is therefore a special service for an emergency, the
emergency being constituted by the present chaotic state of
human life. Epictetus expressly says that in a city of ooyot,
no one would lightly embrace the Cynic profession, for whose
interests could he serve by so doing ? If he did become a
Cynic, he would form human relationships just as do other
men, for then his wife would be a philosopher, likewise, and
his children. But the present state of affairs is like a battle-
field, hence the Cynic should avoid incurring any commit-
ments which will interfere with his service of God. Since
marriage is of all human relationships the most binding, the
Cynic will refrain from marrying, ' lest he lose his kingdom \ l
At first sight this doctrine might appear to contradict the con-
tention of Musonius 2 that marriage is no hindrance to the
philosopher, more especially as Musonius cites Crates to prove
his point, while Epictetus, as we have already seen, is at pains
to point out that the marriage of Crates was a very special
instance, fulfilling conditions that normally could only be
looked for in the * city of ootpoi \ But the contradiction is
more apparent than real. Epictetus recognizes that the duties
of marriage and family life, to which Musonius attaches so
much importance, are part of the role of * the good and worthy
man ' (TO rov Kakov K dyaOov n^oaconov) ; only to the Cynic,
conscious of his special mission, would they be an impediment.
The married Cynic would find himself in a dilemma, for if
he neglected his family duties he could no longer be a good
man, while if he carried them out conscientiously he would
have no time left for his duties as the messenger and scout
that he is. It is therefore best for him to abjure a tie that
makes so many demands, and to reflect that he has * taken all
mankind for his children : the women he has for daughters,
the men for sons : in that spirit he approaches and cares for
them all. ... He reproves them as a father, as a brother,
as a servant of God, who is the Father of us all.' 3

And as his family life is concerned with the Family of Man-
kind, so will his political cares be for the city of Zeus rather
than for the city of Cecrops. What nobler politics could be
found than those in which he is engaged ? Is he to come
forward in Athens and talk about incomes and revenues, when
he ought to be addressing all men about happiness and un-
1 68, 69. 2 M.R., p. 70. i. 14 (Hense). 3 82.

14

194 A HISTORY OF CYNICISM

happiness, slavery and freedom, failure and success ? 1 Nor
will he hold office, for no office is nobler than that he now
has. And if any one tries to scare him by mentioning those
who bear rule and are held in honour, he bids them go look
for children, since he does not fear a painted devil. Nor will
ill-treatment at the hands of the populace deter him from his
mission. He must be prepared to find * that there is this very
pleasant strand woven into the Cynic's life, that he must needs
be flogged like an ass, and while he is being flogged, he must
love the men who flog him, as though he were the father and
brother of them all '. 2 In no point is the resemblance between
the Cynics and the Franciscans, so often commented on, more
striking, though even here the analogy must not be pressed
too far. The Franciscans courted flogging as a healthy moral
tonic : the Cynic, through his spirit of endurance (TO dvexrixov),
supports any ill-treatment that may come his way. For in all
things he is utterly submissive to the will of Heaven, having
always on his lips the words

Lead thou me on, O Zeus and Destiny,
Wherever is ordained by your decree. 8

Epictetus also idealizes the Cynic dress and rationale, its
frugality he leaves unaltered, but refuses to tolerate its custom-
ary squalor. The Cynic's body must be strong and healthy,
an advertisement of the merits of his simple open-air life. If
he can achieve the radiant complexion traditionally associated
with Diogenes, his testimony will carry the more weight. He
should not excite pity, for then people will regard him as a

1 Possibly a reference to Demonax, who held office in Athens, is
intended.

2 The only actual mention we have of a Cynic being flogged is that
already mentioned of the Diogenes who spoke against the marriage
of Titus and Berenice. But it is clear that Epictetus is not speaking
of flogging as a punishment for political agitation. The situation
he envisages is one in which the ordinary man would immediately
appeal to the Proconsul, obviously a case of assault at the hands of
private individuals. The Cynics were exposed to such ill-treatment ;
they were often considered as popular butts, and the stories of assaults
on Diogenes, historically doubtless apocryphal, show the kind of
thing a Cynic might have to endure (D.L., vi. 41, 42, 66, &c.). This
is confirmed by what Dio Chrysostom says about popular opposition
to Cynics in Or. 72.

'96.

IN THE FIRST AND SECOND CENTURIES A.D. 195

beggar and turn away from him. Presumably Epictetus does
not mean to discourage the Cynic from begging for his liveli-
hood, for it is hard to see how else he is to obtain it ; unlike
Musonius, Epictetus does not mention farming as the philos-
opher's most suitable avocation. The point is that the Cynic
must differ from the beggar in outward appearance, so that
men will pay attention to his teachings ; a requirement which
Dio Chrysostom during his Cynic period apparently failed to
satisfy. 1 Even in the squalor of the Cynic, says Epictetus,
there must be something cleanly and attractive. Nor is
na^Qr\aia sufficient by itself, for unless united with great
natural charm and wit, his talk becomes mere snivel (juvt-a
yivercu KOI ovdev d'AAo). Here again Diogenes is held up as
the ideal, but in another respect, to which Epictetus attaches
the greatest importance, even he is found seriously deficient.
Nothing was more characteristic of the old Cynicism than its
ideals of avaldeia and avaiayvvria. Epictetus on the contrary
postulates aida)$ as indispensable, for it must serve the Cynic
as his house, his gates, his guards at the bedroom door, his
concealing darkness ; if once it breaks down, he is caught in
broad daylight and disgraced, and cannot continue to supervise
other men. 2 In this respect it seems possible to detect a wide
divergence in practice between the two groups previously
mentioned as characteristic of Stoicism in the first century.
On the one hand, the street preachers, Stoic and Cynic alike,
seem to have been zealous in maintaining that dvatdeia insisted
on by Diogenes, Zeno, and the early Stoics. But the * official '
representatives of Stoicism, Seneca, Musonius Rufus and
Epictetus, appear to have been as deeply opposed to this aspect
of the older teachings as we have seen was the case with Posi-
donius and Panaetius. The bowdlerization accomplished by
the Middle Stoa was approved by the great Stoics of the
Empire and again one suspects that the tastes catered for are
those which paid tribute to the old Roman ideal of ' gravitas '.
The difference is particularly noticeable when we compare
the views of Diogenes or Zeno on the sexual appetites with
those of the Stoics of our present period. Diogenes had
advocated the casual gratification of natural desires, * Let the
man who persuades lie with the woman who is persuaded' ;
Zeno had been notorious for his practice of homosexuality.
1 Dio Chrya., xiii. i, &c. 2 15.

196 A HISTORY OF CYNICISM

Epictetus insists that the Cynic must abjure all desire for
* wench or boy-favourite ' ; Dio Chrysostom regards brothels
as indefensible, and castigates with great severity the argu-
ments sometimes advanced on their behalf. As for Musonius
Rufus, the whole range of classical literature contains nothing
which more closely approaches the Puritan spirit. Sexual
intercourse is absolutely prohibited except to the legally
married, and they should regard it as ordained for the pro-
creation of children and not for the purposes of pleasure. 1

Such were Epictetus' conception of Cynicism : a profession
the aspirant to which must * think the matter over carefully,
know himself, ask of God, and do nothing without His con-
sent '. 2 It is an idealization of that philanthropy we have
found best exemplified by Crates, expounded at times in
Epictetus' own psychological terminology, and infused with
that religious feeling which marks him out even in a religious
age. The Diogenes of history fell far short of such an ideal ;
and even the Diogenes of literary tradition was undeniably
lacking in the essential quality of aldax;* Epictetus does not

1 M.R. y rl xBcpakalov ydjuov, fr. xiiA and B. Here again, as
indeed in Musonius 5 whole attitude to women, their capabilities and
the respect due to them, the dominant influence appears to be the
old Roman tradition. Admittedly philosophy, as early as the time
of Plato, had protested against the low status of women in Greece,
but the difference between Greek and Roman views is apparent if
we contrast the Conjugalia Praecepta of Plutarch with the teachings
of Musonius on marriage. Plutarch's attitude is merely a more
enlightened expression, not essentially different in kind, of the view
of women found in Xenophon's Oeconomicus. But one feels that
behind Musonius stand the dignified and accomplished figures of the
great Roman matrons, an Arria or a Calpurnia, and the capabilities,
if not the virtues, of such women as the Empress Livia.

2 53-

3 That Epictetus derived his knowledge of Diogenes from the
literary tradition and not from Diogenes* own writings is clear from
the references themselves. In i. 24. 3 he quotes a story about Dio-
genes which Diogenes Laertius gives * on the authority of Dionysius
the Stoic ' (vi. 43). The reference about Diogenes having the duty
of rebuking men in a kingly manner refers to the numerous stories
of his retorts to Plato, Demosthenes, Phryne, Perdiccas, Alexander,
&c., in fact to nearly all the prominent figures of the fourth century.
Epictetus also shows Diogenes as having conversations with the King
of the Persians and with Archidamus, King of Sparta (iv. i. 155) ;
also as writing a letter to the Persian King. He also believes in
the story of Diogenes* capture by pirates (iii. xxiv. 59-66, iv. I.

IN THE FIRST AND SECOND CENTURIES A.D. 197

tell us of any Cynic of his time who approached this level,
and this raises an interesting point. For Demetrius, as we
find him portrayed by Seneca, might seem to fulfil many of
its requirements; he had achieved complete suppression of
desire, his austerity was of unexampled rigour, he professed
complete submission to the will of God. Now Epictetus must
have known Demetrius, for he was a pupil of Musonius in
Rome during Nero's reign. Since he only once mentions
Demetrius, and since his general references to contemporary
Cynicism are contemptuous in tone, it is clear that he did not
regard Demetrius, as did Seneca, as the example of the ideal
Wise Man. Precisely why not we cannot say, though reasons
may be suggested. Demetrius was apparently married ;
furthermore, he was guilty of political agitation, at least during
the reign of Vespasian : both forms of activity which Epictetus
declared inappropriate for the Cynic. But an action even
more likely to awaken Epictetus' dislike was his opposition to
Epictetus' master Musonius in the prosecution of Egnatius
Celer. It is clear from Tacitus how much odium Demetrius
thus incurred, an odium which must have been particularly
deeply felt in Stoic circles where Celer was regarded as an
arch-traitor. Besides his personal ties with Musonius, Epic-
tetus admired the great Roman Stoics, such as Helvidius and
Paconius Agrippinus, and we know that he shared the resent-
ment felt for Celer 's betrayal of his pupil. 1 Small wonder,
then, if he had no great admiration for the philosopher who
took Celer's side. 2 None of his contemporaries, then, seemed
to Epictetus to personify the ideal of the true Cynic ; it had
been most nearly, though even so not wholly, attained by his
favourite exemplar, the Diogenes of literary tradition. In

155 &c.), which we have seen to be almost certainly unhistorical. In
iv. 152, Epictetus seems to assert that Diogenes was not born of
free parents. He also quotes anecdotes that can be paralleled in
Diogenes Laertius (cf. ii. xiii. 26, and D.L., vi. 29, iii. ii. n, and
D.L., vi. 34, iii. xii. iii., and D.L., vi. 23, iv. xxii. 88, and D.L., vi.
81, &c.) ; or from the Epistles of the Cynics. Elsewhere, as Schenkl
notes, he appears to have used letters ascribed to Diogenes that have
not survived (Schenkl, on IV. i. 156).

1 Ep., iv. i. 139.

2 Nothing can safely be inferred from the fact that there is no
mention of Demetrius in Musonius ; for the latter seldom refers to
his contemporaries.

198 A HISTORY OF CYNICISM

actual fact, it is to be doubted whether any came so near to
it as did Epictetus himself.

If in Musonius and Epictetus we find a greater sympathy
for Cynicism than in any later Stoic writing, it must not be
assumed that the Stoicism of the second century was marked
by a reaction from this attitude. It is through Marcus Aure-
lius that most of our knowledge of Stoicism at this period is
derived, and the Stoic tutors of Marcus Aurelius had seen that
phoenix, the Ideal Wise Man, in their own day, in the person
of Epictetus. * Marcus thoroughly Epictetizes ', says the
Scholiast, and he is borne out by the Emperor's grateful recog-
nition of the debt he owes to Rusticus for introducing him to
the writings of Epictetus, and by the frequency of quotations
from Epictetus in the Meditations. Marcus Aurelius shared
the Stoic regard for Diogenes as one of the greatest of all
philosophers ; he quotes Monimus and Crates ; and it is
interesting to find him placing Dio Chrysostom in the com-
pany of Thrasea, Helvidius, Cassius, and Brutus. But his
chief reverence was for Epictetus. What Demetrius had been
to Seneca and Thrasea, such was Epictetus to the Stoics of
the second century. Since the Stoicism of Epictetus was
strongly flavoured with Cynicism, it is safe to assume a sym-
pathy for Cynicism on the part of his enthusiastic admirers.
And we have evidence that the connexion was maintained in
the statement that the Cynic Demonax was one of the pupils
of the Stoic Timocrates of Heraclia. Cynic influence is also
to be found in that interesting and curious little book known
as the Pinax of Cebes, which probably belongs to the second
century. 1 Cebes' interest in Pythagoreanism is not surprising
in a period when Stoicism was far less self-contained than
formerly. The Pinax is another version of the old allegory
of the Pythagorean Y the Two Ways of Life, which is also
the theme of Dio Chrysostom 's story of the Choice of Heracles.
Like Dio, by whom it was probably influenced, it makes
great use of allegorical personification, a regular feature of
Cynic diatribe, developed, though probably not invented, by
Bion. The importance attached to na^reqia and eynqdreia

1 The date of the Pinax is uncertain. The Teubner editor gives
reason for thinking that it is later than Dio Chrysostom, and as we
know it to be earlier than Lucian the first half of the second century
seems the best conjecture.

IN THE FIRST AND SECOND CENTURIES A.D. 199

in acquiring true apery recalls similar Cynic influence on
Musonius.

Throughout this period, then, Cynicism was a kind of radi-
cal Stoicism : the relation between the two may be likened
to that between the more ascetic monastic orders and the main
body of the Catholic Church. Crates, and especially Diogenes,
were major figures of Stoic hagiography ; the KVVIKQI; tqonoq
in garb and rationale differed in degree and not in kind from
that of normal Stoic practice : the vehicle for Stoic popular
propaganda was the diatribe, the chief genre of the KVVIKOS
TQonoi; in literature. Over the external aspects of Stoicism
Cynicism thus exerted a powerful influence, as it had done
in the days of Zeno and Chrysippus. In going back to the
founders of the sect and neglecting the anti-Cynic develop-
ments of the Middle Stoa, the Stoics of the Empire were true
to the retrospective and archaistic tendencies so general in the
culture of their age. The Cynic leanings of Stoicism at this
period, and especially the use of Cynic literary forms for
popular preaching, are responsible for the traces of Cynicism
that can be discovered at third-hand in eclectics who came
under Stoic influence, such as Favorinus and Maximus of
Tyre. The newly-discovered fragments of Favorinus negl
qpvyfjs are an excellent illustration of this point. 1

(c) Favorinus must have been brought into contact with Cynic
ideas through his association with Dio Chrysostom and with
Epictetus ; he is said, though on more doubtful authority, to
have been a warm admirer of Demetrius the Cynic. Exile was,
of course, one of the most hackneyed themes of the Cynic
diatribe, since voluntary or involuntary exile was so often the
prelude to the vagrant Cynic life. The canons of the diatribe
demanded stock figures, traditional metaphors and similes,
which any one wishing to preach to one of the standard texts
would find ready-made ; and in this fragment one can see how
Favorinus has availed himself of them. Thus the familiar
Cynic trio of Heracles, Odysseus, and Diogenes appear as
examples of persons who became famous through exile.
Odysseus also appears again in the Cynic tradition as
TIo\vrqonri<; in the good sense ; he is the wise man who willingly
in his time plays many parts in the drama written by the
Heavenly Playwright.

1 Studi et Testi, No. 53 (il Papiro Vaticano),

200 A HISTORY OF CYNICISM

Amid all the shifts of Fortune, I can imagine him each time saying
to God : * Do you wish me to play the king ? I am willing. A
king will I be, but one unlike Echetus and Sardanapalus and
Arbaces. Do you wish me to be shipwrecked ? I am willing.
Shipwrecked will I be, and more piously than Ajax. Do you wish
me to suffer hunger ? I will do it, and more stoutly than my
comrades. Do you wish me to be a beggar ? I will be a beggar
more beggarly than Irus, and will endure though beaten and struck
most savagely by my foes. If you wish me again to be a king, I
will do it at your command. . . .'

The metaphor of the ' drama of life ', whose first elaboration
was probably due to Bion, was as much a favourite with
Favorinus as with his Stoic contemporaries ; besides the
example quoted, it is elaborated in 2, lines 20-3, line 15.
Another Cynic metaphor used is that of Life as an Olympic
contest, in which the athletes are the aocpol whose training
(aaxqaii;) is to enable them to overcome their opponents, in
their case the numerous oviJi<poQdi that beset human life. Our
contest is not ' on the stage, or at the Dionysia . . . but at
the feast of Heracles, in the stadium of virtue, a contest of
deeds, not of words '. Again, we find the metaphor of the
Voyage of Life, in which the acxpos will adapt himself to
conditions as sailors adapt the rigging to the winds. The
speech is also marked by appeals, in the favourite manner of
the Cynics, to the habits of animals as affording evidence for
the standards of the * natural life '. Thus in 9, 15 ff., it is
asserted that

the earth is the common mother and nurse of all mankind. Now
God gave the finny creatures one fatherland, the sea, to dwell in,
and one to the winged race, the heavens, and to those animals that
dwell on land he allotted a safe refuge, the earth, roofing it over
with the heavens and walling it in with the ocean. Now the birds
and the fish preserve the distribution of God, and so do all other
animals, that dwell on land. But men alone through lust of greed
(nfawefla) portion out the earth, splitting up the gift of God and
dividing it up amongst themselves, &c.

Again, ' The cranes are wiser than we are. For they go from
Thrace to Egypt, and do not think Thrace their home nor
Egypt a land of exile, but to them this is but a change of place,
of dwellings for summer and winter/ The lesson that we

IN THE FIRST AND SECOND CENTURIES A.D. 201

should be content with the qualities we possess tcara yvaiv and
not seek 66t;a and rt^rj is enforced by appealing to

the horse, which never thinks of its repute or ill-repute amongst
other beasts, but thinks that because of its speed it enjoys a kind
of natural sovereignty amongst them. Nor does a lion much care
what the other animals say and think about it, but thinks that it
excels in strength, and they exert the most natural kind of sov-
ereignty over those who are weaker.

Finally, there are reminiscences of well-known
p,ara as Diogenes' remark that if the Sinopeans sentenced
him to exile, he sentenced them to stay at home, or Antis-
thenes' definition of avro%Qovta as a property of slugs and
worms. In fact, the thought of the fragment is essentially
that of a Cynic diatribe. Were the piece anonymous, the only
doubts as to its Cynic origin would be occasioned by the
evidence of rhetorical ability by which it is marked.

(d) Maximus. Similar traces of the influence of Cynicism are
to be found in Maximus of Tyre. Diss. 36 is the most notable
example, in which Maximus discusses the question as to
whether the Cynic life is a nQoriyfjievov, i.e. meet for the Stoic
ooqpos. In deciding in the affirmative he is following the view
we have shown to be dominant in contemporary Stoicism.
The familiar conception of the Cynic life as the life of man in
the Golden Age is developed in the essay.

CHAPTER X

CYNICISM FROM THE THIRD TO THE
SIXTH CENTURIES A.D.

THE importance of Cynicism in the second century is strikingly
reflected in the literature of the time. For its history during
the last three centuries of the Ancient World there is but
incomplete evidence. A few scattered references attest its
existence during the turmoil of the third century : for the
second half of the fourth century there is more detailed evidence
to be had from the attacks of Julian on contemporary Cynics
and from the reference in the Fathers to the career of the
Cynic Maximus : a hundred years later something is known
of the Cynic Sallustius. Of the Cynics known to us by name
during the whole period only Maximus and Sallustius leave
any impression as individuals ; but the general features of
Cynicism are clearly the same as those noticed in the second
century. Julian's description of the charlatans who masquer-
aded as Cynics recalls those of Epictetus and Lucian ; the
connexion of Cynicism with Christianity is illustrated by
Maximus ; while Sallustius reproduces the extreme austerity
and the mysticism of a Peregrinus.

(a) The two orations (6 and 7) of Julian against the Cynics date
from 361. Both by temperament and training Julian was
sympathetic to the ideals of the austerer Cynicism. Though
his tutor Mardonius had endeavoured to arouse him to disgust
towards the unkempt appearance of his fellow-pupil, the
Cynic Iphicles, Julian himself seems to have presented at
Antioch a very model of Cynic squalor, and indeed his mode
of life after he entered Constantinople as Augustus was of
a Cynic simplicity. Moreover, among the Sophists most
admired by Julian, such as Themistius and Libanius, it was
fashionable to profess admiration for Diogenes and Crates.
Yet Julian, while protesting his sympathy with the genuine
Cynic, doubts whether there are any such left ; towards the

202

FROM THE THIRD TO SIXTH CENTURIES A.D. 203

Cynics of his day he feels indignation and disgust. It is not
hard to suggest reasons for this attitude. His adoption of the
* philosopher's garb ' after entering Constantinople as Augustus
drew to his court swarms of Cynics who hoped to exploit
an Imperial sympathizer. ' First arrived Asclepiades, then
Serenianus, then Chytron, then a tall youth with yellow hair
whose name I don't know then you, and with you twice as
many more . . . none of you ever visited a philosopher's
school as diligently as you did my secretary.' But the cold
baths, the simple fare, and the hard living of Julian were not
to the taste of these Cynics ; they expressed their disgust by
ridiculing as * ostentatious ' the asceticism of a Diogenes,
which Julian professed to follow, while Heraclios annoyed
Julian by relating an * impious myth ', in which Julian appeared
as Pan, while he himself was Zeus. It was, therefore, to
reprove the Cynics of his time and to recall them to their
proper duties that Julian delivered the 6th and yth orations
addressed * to the uneducated Cynics ' and ' to the Cynic
Heraclios '. He regards Cynicism as ' the most universal and
natural philosophy ' ; its true founder was the Delphic god
when he gave to mankind the precept, * Know thyself '.
Diogenes he refers to as a * sacred personage ', and emphatically
rejects as spurious the obscene tragedies attributed to him.
Several anecdotes about Diogenes are quoted, and their
meaning rather strained, to show that piety was one of his
characteristics, a moral also deduced from Crates' Hymn to
Simplicity, which was evidently a favourite reading of Julian's.
There is much that recalls Epictetus in his bowdlerized and
spiritualized account of the old Cynicism, and of the frame
of mind in which that way of life must be entered. The
Cynics of his own day disgust Julian by their effeminacy and
shamelessness, which brought philosophy into general dis-
repute, and, above all, by their impiety. ' A Cynic must not
be, like Oenomaus, a scorner of all things human and divine.'
For their shamelessness and impiety he likens them to the
' monks ' who had recently given him much trouble, and he
expects the ' Egyptian Cynic ' of Oration 6 to recognize a
quotation from * the words of the Galilaeans '. The close
association which then existed between Christianity and
Cynicism is exemplified by the career of Maximus.
(V) The evidence for Maximus largely derives from hostile

204 A HISTORY OF CYNICISM

sources, and the authority of such eminent Fathers as Gregory
Nazianzen and Jerome has caused Church historians to follow
them in depicting Maximus as an impudent impostor. But
the bitterness of ecclesiastical controversy did not make for
balanced judgements ; if the extravagant praise of Maximus in
Gregory's 23rd oration be discounted, similar allowance
should be made for his fierce attacks after the Cynic had tried
to oust him from the See of Constantinople.

Maximus was born at Alexandria, presumably earlier than
A.D. 350, of a family which had produced Christian martyrs.
Nothing is known of his training, but he seems to have adopted
Cynicism at an early age, and from the first may well have
combined the Cynic garb and the Christian faith. The Church
was then disturbed by the Arian dispute, and as an adherent
of Athanasius Maximus was involved in the turmoils of the
time. In the disorders of 374 he was whipped and later
banished to the desert, where, according to Gregory, his
constancy and his austerity were a notable example to others
of the faithful. After returning to Alexandria he won the
confidence of the Bishop, Peter II, who sent him to Constanti-
nople in 379. The events that followed are explicable as the
product of cross-currents from two controversies the Arian
conflict and the dispute over the See of Constantinople. The
Arians had then recently lost ground in Constantinople, though
as yet there was no Orthodox bishop ; Gregory Nazianzen
being ' diocesan ' in the Orthodox interest. He had been
appointed to this position by Peter II, whose action was in
accordance with the claim that the Bishop of Alexandria held
control over the appointment to the See of Constantinople.
But Gregory was highly popular with the Catholics of Con-
stantinople, who wished for independence from Alexandria,
and Peter may perhaps have thought it better to have in
Maximus a nominee more under his control.

Gregory welcomed Maximus with enthusiasm, and took the
unusual step of pronouncing a public panegyric over him as
he stood by the altar of the famous church Anastasia. This
speech, known as * Oration in praise of the philosopher Hero ',
is interesting as a Christian opinion of Cynicism. Alluding
to the xaQrsqia of the philosopher, Gregory remarks that
Maximus will demonstrate this quality by listening unmoved
to the recital of his own praises. Then he addresses him as

FROM THE THIRD TO SIXTH CENTURIES A.D. 205

the best and most perfect of philosophers . . . one who follows
our Faith in an alien garb, nay, perhaps not in an alien garb, if the
wearing of bright and shining robes is the mark of angels, as it is
so depicted. . . . This man is a Cynic not through shamelessness
but through freedom of speech, not through gluttony but through
the simplicity of his daily life ... a Dog who greets virtue not
with barking but with hearkening, who fawns on what is friendly
because it is good, who snarls at what is alien because it is bad.

Elsewhere he praises the Cynic 's neglect of speculative philos-
ophy, his philanthropy, and his cosmopolitanism ; and his
superiority to * the meat-eating of Diogenes, the quackery of
Antisthenes, and the wedding of Crates '. However, adds
Gregory, we must spare the ancient Cynics through our
reverence for Maximus. He then proceeds to an account of
Maximus' deeds and sufferings as a supporter of the Nicene
faith, and concludes by exhorting him to continue to combat
* Gentile superstitions ' and to uphold orthodoxy.

But Gregory was much deceived by Maximus. The Cynic
intrigued against him in Constantinople and tried to form a
party of his own supporters ; finally he attempted a coup by
getting himself ordained Bishop at a secret and midnight
service in the church. But news of this attempt leaked out
and the service was interrupted by the civil authorities and
the populace, who drove Maximus and his adherents from the
church ; they fled to a * flute-player's shop ', where the
ordination was completed. How long Maximus remained in
the See on which he had thus imposed himself is uncertain,
but it must have been long enough for him to carry out several
acts and ordinations. But popular discontent forced him
to appeal to Theodosius in Thessalonica, who charged the
Bishop of Thessalonica to refer to Damasus, Bishop of Rome.
Damasus replied with two letters, still extant, strongly con-
demning both Maximus and the manner of his ordination.
Maximus then returned to Alexandria to claim the support of
Peter II ; the latter refused, perhaps because he thought it
unwise to oppose the wishes of the Orthodox community in
Constantinople, when they were so clearly expressed. There-
upon Maximus headed a * disorderly mob ' of supporters, and
caused such a disturbance that he was expelled from Egypt by
the Prefect. To this period belong the hostile references to
Maximus in the Carmina and epistles of Gregory, whose

206 A HISTORY OF CYNICISM

admiration for ' the most perfect of philosophers ' had changed
to bitter hatred of the man who had tried to supplant him on
the Bishop's throne.

At the Oecumenical Council of 381 Maximus' ordination
was pronounced uncanonical, and his acts invalidated. But
this Council was held at Constantinople, where the interests
of the Eastern Church may well have predominated. The
issue was probably as much between Constantinople and
Alexandria as between Gregory and Maximus, for the Second
Canon of the Council restricted the authority of the Bishop of
Alexandria to Egypt. Rebuffed in the East by both Emperor
and Church, Maximus appealed to the West. He put his case
to the Italian bishops at the Synod of Milan, and tried to
strengthen his claims by presenting to the Emperor Gratian
' a notable polemic against the Arians ', which Sajdak l con-
jectures to be the * writing ' included in the works of Athanasius
as ' N. adversus Arianos '. The Latin bishops decided to
support Maximus, and demanded that a new General Council
should be held at which the whole question of the See of
Constantinople might be settled. Theodosius, however, re-
fused to re-open the question of Maximus* ordination, and
at the Synod of Rome in 383 the Italian bishops withdrew
their support. At this point Maximus disappears from history ;
the only further reference is that of the Church Council of
861, which pronounced an anathema upon him.

Of the man himself it is hard to form a judgement when we
hear little about him except unrelieved abuse or praise. The
issues with which he was concerned were clearly of the highest
importance to the Church, and the fact that he had the con-
fidence to appeal to both the Eastern and Western Emperors,
and that, at least temporarily, he gained the support of Peter
II and Ambrose, suggests that he must have been a person
of ability. It is true that on at least two occasions he was the
cause of riots, but such disturbances were almost inseparable
from the fierce ecclesiastical controversies of the time. In
such ages as the fourth century A.D. there is a tendency for the
judgements of History to be delivered on the formula vae
victis ! Maximus, as an unsuccessful claimant, may well have
been a victim.

(c) There is little reason to doubt that for Cynicism in general
1 Quaest. Nagianzenicae, Pt. i.

FROM THE THIRD TO SIXTH CENTURIES A.D. 207

Gregory Nazianzen had a warm sympathy ; the enmity which
developed between him and Maximus was a purely personal
quarrel. The extensive influence of the Cynic diatribe and
its ' commonplaces ' in his sermons has been fully shown
by Geffcken. 1 And indeed it is not surprising that many in
the Church should have welcomed the Cynics as allies in the
fight for the ideals of poverty and asceticism. St. Basil
expressed admiration for Diogenes, whose way of life he
regarded as a heathen exemplar of that of the poor monk. But
nowhere are these Cynic affinities better exemplified than in
the works of Asterius, Bishop of Amasea. There Lazarus
appears as the beggar-philosopher : the Cynic similes of the
Doctor and the Scout are borrowed to describe the functions of
the Apostles : and Christ preaching to the rich young man
uses almost the accents of Crates in exhorting him to renounce
worldly goods and cleave to Philosophy, the only mother of
virtue. As Bretz 2 rightly says, Asterius and his like stand at
the junction of the pagan and the Christian worlds.

(d) Sallustius, who is referred to in Damascius' Life of his
friend Isidorus, is the last known to us by name of the long
line of followers of Diogenes. He was probably born about
A.D. 430, and since Damascius speaks of him as a contemporary,
it is likely that he lived into the sixth century. The origins of
Cynicism lay in the period of the end of Classical Greece and
the beginnings of the Hellenistic Age ; Sallustius stands at
the death of the Graeco-Roman civilization to which the
Hellenistic world gave birth. In 529 the philosophical schools
of Athens were closed.

The characteristic features of Cynicism were vigorously
marked in its last-known adherent : the references to Sallustius
would serve to describe a Cynic of the time of Lucian, or
even, but for an element of mysticism, of the time of Crates.
But in the sixth century Sallustius was an archaism : perhaps
he was consciously so, for we hear that during his training
in rhetoric he showed a preference for the ancient orators
over the admired models of the day.

Born, like so many Cynics, in Syria, he had an education
in rhetoric and sophistic that recalls that of Dio Chrysostom.

1 Kynika und Verwandtes ; vide index, sub. Greg. Naz.
* ' Studien . . . zu Asterios von Amasea ', in Harnack und Schmidt
Texte und Untersuch, 3te Reihe, 10.

208 A HISTORY OF CYNICISM

He studied rhetoric at Emesa, for philosophy he went to Athens
and later to Alexandria. But the dogmatic schools had no
attraction for him. ' Philosophy ', he declared, * is not only
hard for mortal men, it is impossible.' He therefore set out
as a vagrant Cynic to wander the world. He seems to have
stayed for some time in Dalmatia with Marcellinus, in whom
he may have found the Ideal Ruler sought by the Ideal Philos-
opher. After Marcellinus' death he went with Isidorus to
Alexandria. Asmus 1 has shown how the Alexandrian neo-
Platonists had an interest in Cynicism, and Sallustius would
appear to have been adopted by the curious circle that worked
for a revival of Hellenism. No doubt they saw in him the
pattern of the ao^o'c, as Seneca did in Demetrius, and Marcus
Aurelius in Epictetus. There are the same praises of his
asceticism, his boldness before tyrants, his scorn for rv<po$.
He was opposed to the Christians and to the Christianized
Cynics ; though he himself was not devoid of mysticism.
For he practised a curious kind of divination, ' by looking into
people's eyes he could foretell the manner of their deaths ',
as he is said to have done with Marcellinus. The neo-
Platonists of Alexandria were dispersed in the Isaurian rising
of 488, and nothing is known of Sallustius' life after that date.
Sallustius is chiefly interesting as a proof that in the last
age of the Ancient World the * Island of Pera ', the Cynic
paradise, was still inhabited. How long it so continued is
uncertain. It is likely that Cynics were known in the Byzantine
Empire, but by then Pera must have been a veritable Easter
Island. Long ago Onesicratus had praised the virtues of the
* noble savage ', by the sixth century A.D. the savage had come
again and conquered the world. The State and its institu-
tions, which Diogenes had found an intolerable burden on
the individual, were shattered, and the ordinary individual
worse off than ever before. Having little to hope for in this
world, he turned to a religion that would promise him redress
in the next. Cynicism had nothing further to offer mankind.

1 * Der Kyniker Sallustius bei Damascius ', Neue Jahr, xxv, 1910.

EPILOGUE

THE sixth century A.D. is the proper finishing-point for a
History of Cynicism.

But the ' universal and most natural philosophy ' which
Julian saw represented in Cynicism has continued to claim
adherents * in all ages and all places '. The Wise Men of the
East teach the same lessons that they taught centuries before
Diogenes, and the ' naked philosophers ' are as conspicuous
in India to-day as when Onesicratus saw them on the banks
of the Ganges. A similar continuity is lacking in the Western
world ; but it is possible to point to outbreaks of kindred
movements at various ages as manifestations of a tendency
deeply rooted in human nature, and asserting itself whenever
the rights of the individual need upholding against the political,
moral, or economic constraints of society.

The link between the Ancient World and that of the Middle
Ages is here to be found in the ascetic orders of Christianity,
with whom the Cynics had had direct connexion. But the
Cynics had confined themselves to Rome and to the Eastern
half of the Roman Empire ; monasticism and anchoritism,
originally hardly distinct, reached the West about A.D. 400.
Later they spread to Britain and were adopted with enthusiasm
by the Celtic Church, especially in Ireland. 1 The later revival
of anchoritism in the eighth to tenth centuries under the Rule
of Tallaght is particularly notable, for it gave rise to the finest
expression of asceticism known to literature.

The ascetic fare, hard bed, and coarse clothing, were some of the
means by which the hermits attained their chief objects, spiritual
purity and communion with God unhampered by the defilements
of the flesh ; continual prayer and penitence were to be their
occupation, and peacefulness, free from disturbing emotions and
alarms, was the way of life desired. 2

1 Cf. K. H. Jackson, Early Celtic Nature Poetry (Cambridge
University Press).

2 op. cit., p. 99.

15 209

2io A HISTORY OF CYNICISM

The descriptions of the life of the Irish hermits contain remark-
ably close parallels to the austerities of Cynicism ; Coemgen
is said to have lived at Glendaloch *

without food but the nuts of the wood and the plants of the ground
and pure water to drink ; and he had no bed but a pillow of stone
under his head and a flag under him and a flag on each side of him,
and he had no dwelling above him, and the skins of wild beasts
were clothing for him.

But the quiet humility of the Irish hermits was alien to the
Cynic spirit ; and their love of wild nature and sympathy for
the birds and animals which shared their life in the woods could
scarcely be matched in the whole range of classical literature.
Centralizing tendencies were predominant in the Christian
world between 1000 and 1200, marked by the great increase
in the power of the papacy and the extension of the Roman
pattern of Church organization throughout Christendom. The
anchorite movements gave way before Benedictine monas-
ticism, though they did not everywhere die out, as witness the
Culdees in Scotland. But the great increase in the temporal
power and material possessions of the Church soon aroused
opposition, 2 which found its strongest expression in the sects
known as Albigenses or Catharists, a movement which owed
doctrinal allegiance to the anchorites of the Eastern Church.
Violently anti-clerical, and insisting on asceticism, they offer
a parallel to the reaction of the Cynics to official Stoicism,
while the division of the sect into Credents and Perfect! recalls
Epictetus* views of the relations between the ordinary * good
man ' and the Cynic philosopher. How widespread were
dissatisfaction with monastic capitalism and a desire to return
to simpler standards is unmistakably shown by the rapid
growth of the Dominican and Franciscan orders at the begin-
ning of the thirteenth century. St. Dominic realized that for
the suppression of the Albigensian heresy it was necessary to
have orthodox missionaries who could equal the poverty and
asceticism of the Perfecti, and who could make similar use of
the appeal to the Poverty of Christ. The parallel between the
Cynics and the mendicant friars is of course widely familiar.

1 op., cit., p. 98.

2 Cf. G. G. Coulton, Five Centuries of Religion, Vol. ii, esp. c. i
and 6-9,

EPILOGUE 211

When the Dominicans punned on their name and called them-
selves the * Domini canes ' it is most improbable that any
reference to Diogenes was or could have been intended, but
a modern observer may translate the phrase in a more special
meaning as ' the Cynics of the Lord '. The Franciscans,
wandering through the world, voluntarily living at subsistence
level, getting money for their needs by toil in the fields or by
begging, and everywhere preaching to the people, invite com-
parison with Epictetus' ideal of Cynicism as a special service
in an emergency. Like Dio Chrysostom, St. Francis believed
that poverty was in itself a good thing, and he, too, called on
the poor not to endow themselves, but to despoil themselves. 1
But he did not believe that his followers should practise any
greater degree of asceticism than was inseparable from their
way of life, he discouraged mendicancy, and his spirituality
and that of many of his followers are without parallel amongst
the Cynics.

The more radical sects of the Reformation, with their in-
sistence on the supreme importance of the individual and their
appeal to the oppressed classes, also offer an interesting com-
parison with the Cynics. Particularly is this true of the
Anabaptists, who opposed all constituted authority, and
regarded the State as inherently evil. Their longing for a
divine leader, expressed in such pamphlets as The Reformation
of the Emperor Frederick ///, are curiously like the Cynic
Search for the True King. But they differed from the Cynics
in that they had a programme of social amelioration ; they
were the * religion of the proletariat ' in a modern sense, we
have seen that Cynicism was not its philosophy. That they
represented a serious danger to the civil and religious au-
thorities is shown by the energetic measures taken to suppress
them. The sects which survived, such as the Quakers and
Baptists, were less radical : their championship of individual
rights was primarily concerned with securing freedom of
worship and of personal religious experience.

In modern times the movement most akin to Cynicism is
Anarchism. In the eighteenth century it appears, though not
under that name, in the speculations of Rousseau and Diderot
on the Golden Age, or later in Blake's vision of the Age of
Innocence ; all marked by nostalgia for an imaginary age when
1 Cf. Coulton, op. cit,, c. 8.

212 A HISTORY OF CYNICISM

man as an individual had the widest scope for achieving
happiness, untrammelled by the constraints of the social
system. As a political factor Anarchism belongs to the nine-
teenth century, and dates from Proudhon, whose chief aim
was to secure for the masses liberation from economic tyranny.
Later Anarchists, such as Stirner, advocate the full liberation
of the individual from all moral and social bands. Bakunin
regarded the State as a ' historically necessary evil ', the neces-
sity for which mankind will soon outgrow. It is especially
interesting to find Kropotkin recognizing the * best exposition
from the Ancient World of the principles of Anarchism ' in
the Republic of Zeno, which was of course composed when
Zeno was under the influence of Cynicism. Anarchism was
most important in the middle decades of the nineteenth cen-
tury ; in 1871 the International Working Men's Association
was formed. Its importance has since declined, partly due to
its adoption, towards the end of the century, of a policy of
violence, more particularly to the rival attractions of Com-
munism, which also attacks the economic system and can point
to some spectacular successes. But to the Anarchist, the
State Capitalism envisaged by the Communists will merely
mean replacing one tyranny by another. Though Anarchism
has been of small importance of recent years it continues to
exist, and recent events in Spain, 1 a country where it has taken
root more deeply than in any other, have again brought it into
general notice.

There remains another very different force to be considered
among those working in favour of individualism in the modern
world. Ever since the great explorations of the fifteenth and
sixteenth centuries the Frontier has been a prominent feature
in the life of the Western nations and has been both the refuge
and the nursery of individualism. In the woods of America,
on the African veldt, in the bush of Australia, men have won
freedom from the constraints of society, and have developed
the character of the Pioneer. This, in its insistence on the
importance of the individual, in the self-sufficiency demanded
by its environment, in its dislike for law and authority even
where their effects are beneficial, and lastly, in its frequent
contempt for learning and culture, has many features in
common with Cynicism.

1 Written in 1936.

EPILOGUE 213

Our own age is one in which centralizing tendencies are
again dominant. In Germany, Italy, and Russia the State
claims complete authority over the individual ; the material
efficiency thus attained forces rival nations to similar measures.
Modern industrial methods, which are being rapidly extended
to cover all fields of labour, reduce the worker to the level of
a cog in a machine. A standardized urban civilization is
everywhere menacing local cultures. The Frontiers are
closing down ; it may well be that within a generation the
last frontier will have been reached. The precedents of his-
tory suggest that we may expect a reaction towards individu-
alism. For this conflict between the claims of society and the
claims of the individual is as fundamental as that of the Love
and Strife of Empedocles :

ph 0Mrrjri, ovveQ%6fj,ev' el$ ev dnavra
ddv 6i%* exaara

being rooted in the dual nature of Man, at once a gregarious
animal, and a separate personality.

l Emped., fr. 17. n. 67-8.

APPENDIX I

THE succession of the Ionian philosophy, according to Diogenes
Laertius, i. 14.

Thales

Anaximander
Anaximenes
Anaxagoras

Archelaus
I

SOCRATES

Aristotle

Theophrastus

Plato

Speusippus
Xenocrates

Polemo

Grantor

Crates

Middle Academy
New Academy.

Antisthenes

Diogenes
Crates

Zeno
Cleanthes
Chrysippus

2*5

APPENDIX II

THE whole passage is technical to a degree one does not associate
with Diogenes ; and the expression ratfrrjv naff f\v ev yvftvaatq awe-
ye.1 yivofjidvai (pavraalai evAvalav nqo<; rd rrjq dgerrjc; eqya naqB^dvrai is
an obscure one. The wording at first sight seems Stoic, and von
Fritz argues that the passage derives from one of the Stoic compila-
tions which we have seen were foisted on to Diogenes ; he thinks
it would be in place in the negi dgerrj^. But before refusing to
accept the theory as that of Diogenes, it is necessary briefly to
consider the use of the word (pavraala in the fourth century, particu-
larly in Plato and Aristotle, (i) (pavraala is an abstract noun derived
from the verb (pavra&aOai, and its primary meaning is simply that
of * appearance '. (When Aristotle says of (pavraala that it is ovo^a
dn6 rov (pdoQ eUrjyev one must admit that here is an ancient etymology
that is substantially correct.) It is used in this simple and very
general sense in Theaetetus 1520. Discussing Protagoras' proposi-
tion that ola exaara Ifiol (pdiverai, roiavra pev eanv ejtol Socrates
points out that hence (pavraaia xal aiaOrjais r* avrov [earlv] ev re
BeQftolg xal ndai rots roiovrou; [i.e. * seeming and perception are
the same in cases of heat, &c.']. On this theory, he says, the whole
science of dialectics is quite useless r& yaq emoxonetv KOI tmxeiQeiv
eMy%eiv rag dAA^Acov (pavraala$ KQ.I dot-as, dgOds Ixdarov o^fcrag, o^
ftaxgd ph xai dicohvyCos (pkvaQta ; Aristotle also uses (pavraala in
this sense in de Anima [4026, 23], where ard rty yavcaatav
= xord rovro 8 (paivsrai rjftiv.

(2) A more technical use is that of Sophist, 264A, B, where
(palvsiai (== yavraaCa) is defined as cw////ef aioOrjadax; xal 66rj<;
' a mixture of perception and judgement \ yavraala in this passage
is distinguished from dog a as arising through sensation, while d6ga
arises * by thought in the soul ' (ev yvxfj Hard diavoiav). (pavraala
is, however, one of the most elastic words in Plato, and in Philebus
3 9 A. Plato speaks of a d6a ex /w^/^g xai dioOrjatcog which is the
same as the (pavraala of Sophist 2646.

(3) Philebus 396 describes ' imagination ' as a * painter in the
soul ' who produces (pavrda/jiara ea>yQa(pij/Aeva 9 which are the elxoves
ra>v . . . doaaQevrwv xal foyo/jidvwv (i.e. * imagination ' in a more
* fanciful ' sense than a recorder of sensations, the faculty for which
is likened simply to a scribe).

216

APPENDIX II 217

(4) Aristotle's formal definition of (pavraata is to be found in
De Anima, c. iii. He uses it to denote the faculty of imagination,
but finds the Platonic definitions unsatisfactory. For the higher
animals have imagination in its * reproductive sense ', since they
live rats (pavraaidi<; xal ralq fivrjftaiQ. Hence do'fa, which Plato had
introduced into his definition of (pavraata, must be divorced from
it. For (5o'a is followed by ntanq, and one cannot talk of ntaru;
amongst irrational creatures. Aristotle 's own definition of (pavraata,
is xlvrjaig vno rrjq aladrjaeoog rfj$ xar* evagyslav yiyvoftevr) 1 (' a motion
generated by actual perception ' Hicks). In other words, while
for Plato (pavraata in the sense of imagination was a form of judge-
ment, for Aristotle it was a form of perception an dadevfjs ri$ alaBqau;,
a residuum of sense perception in the mind, made weaker by the
absence of real sensation. The De Anima and especially this
passage is of fundamental importance for Stoic epistemology : Zeno
really added nothing except the famous KaraKr\nriK^ (pavraata, which
is the basis for knowledge. 2

The plural (pavraatai was also used in a general and a technical
sense. Thus corresponding to (i) above is the phrase rag dMrjhcov
yavraatas xai d6a<; of Theaetetus i6zE, also Aristotle's remark
that di (pavraaiai yiyv6vrai at n^eiovg \pevdel<;. Corresponding to
the meaning of a residue of sense-perception are the * writings in
the soul ' of Philebus (which Plato does not actually call (pavraatai in
the passage), and Aristotle's reference to the (pavraaiai xai ^vri^ai
which govern the life of the more highly developed animals, and
to the (pavraatai which remain in us and are o^otai rats alaOrjaeai*
Hicks 4 rightly compares this use of (pavraotai with the ' fancies '
which Hobbes defines as ' motions within us, reliques of those
made by the senses '. It is in this way that one must interpret
the educational theory under discussion. The da^aiQ of gymnastics
gives rise to a set of yavraaiai in the mind that make easy (noQB^ovrai
nQog evhvotav) the performance of virtuous acts. Relevant in this
connexion is Aristotle's account of the part played by (pavraata in
the * instincts ' of animals (oifo dgexTixdv TO (dov avev (pavtaolaq) ;
we are told that Diogenes 5 strongly insisted on the well-being
(eve&a of the body) ; such well-being existed when the natural
instincts had full play.

So much for an elucidation of the theory, which is seen to be
one that could have been propounded in the fourth century. But
can it be that of Diogenes ? Certainly he cannot have originated
it, for the theory of sensation which underlies it that of the mind

1 De Anim.y 429(2. i. 2 Cf. von Arnim, Stoic, vet. fr.

8 De Anim., 429^. 13. 4 Aristotle's De Anima, n. to 4290. 13.

6 D.L., vi. 70.

ai8 A HISTORY OF CYNICISM

as a wax tablet, the locus classicus for which is Theaetetus 19 iC
was a familiar one in the fourth century. The importance of
gymnastics as a mental training is found in the Pythagoreans, with
their doctrine of $vQ{j,6<;, which is expounded by Plato in the Timaeus
and Laws. Taylor says in his edition of the Timaeus *

Two things are necessary if a man is to acquire virtue and wisdom.
(a) He must get right nurture (dqQf] rgoyr}) from the first ... his
body must grow up in the right way. . . . For this reason Plato
starts his great discussion in the Laws (vii, 788 seqq.) by demanding
that even before the child is born its mother's diet and exercise shall
be carefully regulated, and as soon as it is born the first care shall
be to see that it grows ogOov ' straight-limbed '. . . . The Pytha-
goreans were medical men as well as mathematicians the later
tradition was that the society attached the highest importance to diet
and exercise, and made imps fata acbjuarot; a prominent part of the
day's duty. . . . Later on, we see that Timaeus regards bad bodily
condition, inherent or deprived from improper rgdyr], as a chief
source of mental defects, (b) natdevmg must come to the aid of dgdrj
Tg6(prj. In the section on the diseases of the soul we are expressly
told that the two ways of avoiding badness are correct on the one
hand, and moral and intellectual education on the other ngodv/uqreov
. . . ctt did TQO(prj$ Kal <5t* emrridev^arcov juaOijjuarcov <pevyeiv
Vy rotivavrlov d

To return to the passage of Diogenes Laertius : von Fritz, 2 from
the fact that it contains an unusually large number of termini
technici, supposes it to be taken from one of the Stoic works foisted
on to Diogenes. Of these technical terms he enumerates * die
bezeichnendste ' as follows : (a) daxqais, tfdovrj, novos, tteherri,
(b) (pavraatai, drehris, rd nQoarixovra xarogOovcrOai, rd xard <pvaw
alqelodai. Of these group (a) is * aus Antisthenes und die xvvfopoG
auch sonst bekannt. Die ubrigen sind spezifische Schulausdrucke
der Stoa.' To (a) may be added euef/a, tcr#vg, gfavOeQia and a
reference to Heracles. As for (b) yavraaia has been dealt with,
dreArjg was in common use in fourth-century prose before it became
a Stoic technical term. 3 The phrase rd nQoafaovra xaroQQovaQai as
such I do not find in the passage ; rd nQoatfxovra and xarogOovodat,
occur separately, but the same remark applies to them as to dreA?fc. 4
Nor does rd xard yvaiv aiQelaBai occur expressis verbis ; the exact
phrase is ddov o$v dvrl r&v d%Qtf<ncov n6vcov roi)Q xard yvoiv algel(f-
Oai ; the distinction between * natural * and * unnatural ' n6voi

1 p. 273. 2 op. cit., p. 58 seqq.

8 cf. Plato, Phaedrus 2486 ; Andoc, 30. 12.
4 cf. Xen., Gyr., 3. 3. i ; Plato, Cratyl., 413(1 ; Xen., Mem., 3.
i. 3 ; Thuc. vi. 12.

APPENDIX II 219

probably was a contemporary Cynic doctrine, as we shall shortly
see. Von Fritz* argument that the passage * best fits * the treatise
yieQi dQerfjg, that this work is only known in the catalogue of Sotion,
which was compiled under Stoic influence, and that hence we have
an additional reason for assigning the theory contained in the
passage to the Stoics rather than to Diogenes is decidedly arbitrary
in the first link. The piece of Anaxagorean physics used by
Diogenes to justify cannibalism and the ' sophism ' by which he
showed the reasonableness of breakfasting in the market-place,
suggest that he would borrow from science or dialectic when it
suited his argument. And that this was true of contemporary
Cynics is to be inferred from a reference of Menander to Diogenes'
follower Monimus * ; that he pronounced all suppositions to be
illusions (r6 ydg fijioArj(pOv rvyov elvai nav e(prf) tfnohqipis as a technical
term for * supposition ' occurs not only in Aristotle, 2 but also in
the epistemology of Epicurus. 8

We do in fact possess evidence that the circle of Diogenes held
the view * abeunt studia (gymnastica) in mores ' ; I mean the
curious and interesting fragments of Onesicratus of Astypalaea or
Aegina, preserved in Strabo, xv. i. 63. 64. Onesicratus was the
Xenophon of the circle of Diogenes, * for as Xenophon joined the
expedition of Cyrus, so did Onesicratus that of Alexander ' (D.L.,
vi. 84). During Alexander's campaigns in India Onesicratus came
into contact with a sect of ascetics, the Gymnosophists, whom,
true to Greek habit, he portrays as so many Cynics. He tells us
the names of two of them, Calanus and Mandanis ; and attributes
to them doctrines which bear a close reference to those ascribed to
Diogenes, particularly in our present passage. Calanus says : ' In
the beginning the world was full of barley-meal and wheat . . .
and the fountains flowed with honey and milk, with wine and olive
oil. But by reason of luxury and gluttony man fell into fifois '
(cf. the dictum of Diogenes that the gods had given to men the
means of living easily, but by reason of the search after honeyed
cakes and unguents and the like, this had been lost sight of). 4
Zeus, seeing this state of affairs, appointed for men a life of toil
(novos). But when self-control and other virtues reappeared, then
there was again an abundance of blessings (cf. in our passage . . .
' instead of useless toils men should choose those in accordance
with nature, when they could live happily '). Still more relevant
is the speech of Mandanis.

1 D.L., vi. 83 : The passage is quoted from Menander's Hippo-
comus.

2 Magn. Mor. i. 35. 13 ; Rhet. 3. 15. i.

8 D.L., x. 34 ; Epic. Epist. iii, apud D.L., x. 123.
* D.L., vi. 44.

220 A HISTORY OF CYNICISM

He said that the best form of discipline (Adyog), was that which
removed from the mind rjdovrj and Awn?. Also that toil (ndvog) and
pain (Atfo??) differ for pain is hostile (nohefAtov), but toil beneficial
(9?d/m>). For they exercise their bodies in toil to strengthen their
intelligence : by these means they put down discord and are present
as advisers naaiv dyadcov xai uoivfi xal Idlq.

(Cf. in our passage,

Diogenes would adduce indisputable evidence to show how easily
from gymnastic training we arrive at virtue. For . . . take the case
of athletes : what surpassing skill they acquire by their own incessant
toil : if they had transferred their efforts to the training of the mind,
how certainly their labours would not have been unprofitable or
ineffective.)

After saying this Mandanis asked whether such doctrines were to
be found among the Greeks. Onesicratus answered that such were
taught by Pythagoras and Socrates and Diogenes * and I was a
pupil of his '.

We see, then, that the theory of sensation and the dependent
theory of education contained in the passage were familiar in the
fourth century ; that the interdependence of mental and gymnastic
training was a doctrine current in the circle of Diogenes ; that
Diogenes and the contemporary Cynics would borrow scientific
terms when convenient. The inference is, that though the theories
in the passage cannot have been the invention of Diogenes, they
may well have been expounded in the * germana Diogenis Scripta '.

APPENDIX III
TEXTS RELATING TO HIPPARCHIA

SEE Diels, Frag. Poet. Phil. Crates ; Testimonia vitae, fr. i, 2, 3,
and add.

i. Menander, Didumi (fr. nyK).

Gv^neqinairiaei^ yap TQlpcov 9 %ovo* efiol
tiansQ Kgdrrin ra> KWM& noO' tf ywrj,
KOI OwyardQ' sdda)x' Ixetvog, ax; lyr\
ai5rog, em neigq dodq TQidxovO'

2. Antipater of Sidon, Anth., vii. 413.

9 Ov%l paQvaroA/MJw f Inndgxia eQya ywaix&v

i&v d Kw&v ihonav Q
ovdi ftol afjLne%6vai nQovr)Tide$, ov
c;, ov fanocov e&ade

incovt awejurjOQoi;, & re
f, xal xofaas pAfjp

MaivaMai; xdQQcov j" juvdfta j* '
roaaov, Saaov aocpia xQelaaov

3. Epictetus iVi., xxii. 76 especially.

dAAd Kgdrrjs eyrj/uev neQiaraaiv juoi A^yetg HQCDTOQ yevojuevrjv nol
yvvalxa rlQsu; aAAov Kqarrfia. tf]Lii<; d negl i&v xowa>v ydjucov xal
dneQKttdrcor r)Tov{iev t xal oflrcoc; ^TOVVTEQ ov% Ivglaxofiev Iv ravrfi rfj
xaTaardaei nQoyyov/jievov rep KVVIKW to

221

INDEX

Agathoboulos, 175 f.
Albigenses, 210
Alcibiades, 11

Alexander the Great, 35, 39, 99
Alexandria, Cynics in, 176
Alexarchus, 35
Anabaptists, 211
Anarchism, 37, 212
Antigonus Doson, 77
Antigonus Gonatas, 63, 69
Antisthenes, 1-16, 23, 27, 28
Antoninus Pius, 177
Apollodorus, of Seleucia, 103
Aratus, of Sicyon, 75 f.
Arcesilaus, 101, 102
Aristippus, of Cyrene, 46, 103
Ariston, of Chios, 100-3, 108, 109
Aristotle, 2, 14, 29, 34, 45, 57,

216, 217
Asterius, Bishop of Amasea, 207

Bion, of Borysthenes, 62-9, 89-92
Blake, 37

Cercidas, 5, 74-84, 93 f.
Christianity, and Cynicism, 172-

175, 204-7

Chrysippus, 56, 102, 169
Cleanthes, 102
Cleomenes, the Cynic, 60
Cleomenes III, of Sparta, 75, 76,

78,80
Colophon, shrine of Apollo at,

i66ff.

Colotes, 107

Cosmopolitanism, 35, 68
Crates, 2, 42~53> 5-8
Cyrenaics, and Cynics, 1 0^3 f.
Cyrus, the Great, 13

Demetrius, of Alexandria, 60
Demetrius, Cynic phil., ist cent.
A.D., 125-8, 136, 142

Demonax, 158-62, 178

Diatribe, 38, in

Dio Chrysostom, 32, 57, 148-58

Diocles, of Magnesia, 122

Diodorus, of Aspendus, 6, 7

Diogenes Laertius, 1-7, 33, 54,
&c.

Diogenes, of Sinope, i, 2, 7, 8, 17-
42,60,68, 81,86,91,92, 97,
103, no, 117, 119, 122, 123,
146, 151, 159, 173, 179, 189,
192, 196, 199, 205, 216-20

Diogenes, the Stoic, 91

Dominicans, 210 f.

Domitian, i37ff. i52f.

Egnatius Celer, 133, 197
Epictetus, 50, 139, 1 60, 190-8
Epicureans, and Cynics, 106, 107
* Epistles of the Cynics ', 123 f.
Eprius Marcellus, 133 ff.
Eratosthenes, 52, 68, 101
Eubulus, 38, 87
Euripides, 81

Favonius, Marcus, 120 f.

Favorinus, 199 f.

Francis, St., of Assisi, 28, 194,

211

Getae, 151

Gregory Nazianzen, 204 ff.

Hedonists, and Cynics, 103 f.
Hegesias, 28, 38
Helvidius Priscus, 132-6
Heracles, 13, 21, 43, 57, 155, 180,

l82, 200

Hicesias, 20, 21, 54 f.
Hipparchia, 49-52, 221
Hippias, of Elis, 15
Hippobotus, 7
Hipponax, 113

223

224

A HISTORY OF CYNICISM

Hobbes, 217
Horace, 68, 119, 120

Indian ' Philosophers ', and Cyni-
cism, 39, 40, 178, 179, 209, 219
Ireland, Asceticism in, 209 f.

Julian, the Emperor, 7, 8, 202 ff.
Justin, 174

Leonidas, of Tarentum, 115
Lucian, and Menippus, 70-4 ;
Fugitivi, 144 f. ; Vita Demo-
nactis, 158 f. ; De Morte
Peregrini, 170, 171
Lydiades, 92, 93

Macedonia, 38, 73-8, 80
Marcus Aurelius, 198
Maximus, the Cynic, 204 ff.
Maximus, of Tyre, 201
Megalopolis, politics of, 74-8,

92 f.
Megarian School, and Cynicism,

45, 57, 95, 96

Meleager, of Gadara, 19, 121 f.
Menander, 6, 50, 52, 92
Menedemus, the Cynic, 61, 107
Menedemus, of Eretria, 45, 96
Menippus, 69-74
Metrocles, of Maroneia, 47, 48
Monimus, 40 f.
Mucianus, 135 f.
Musonius Rufus, 129, 132, 189 f.,

196

Neo-Eleatics, logic of, i, 14
Neo-Pythagoreans, and Cynicism,

179, 180, 198, 208
Nero, 1 30 ff .
Nerva, 141

Oenomaus, of Gadara, 162-70,

184

Onesicratus, 39, 219, 220
Oracles, criticism of, 162-70

Panaetius, 91, 103, 118
Papyri :

Berlin, No. 13044 : 123

Bouriant, No. i : 53

Papyri contd. :

Hercul., Nos. 155, 339 : 53
Heidelberg, No. 210 : 88, 89
Londinensis, No. 155 : 88, 89
Hibeh., i., i. : 113

Philiscus, of Aegina, 25, 38

Philo Judaeus, 186, 187

Philodemus, 36, 65, 103

Phoenix, of Colophon, 89, 1 14

Plato, 6, 10, ii, 12, 14, 15*23, 27,
34, 36, 216, 217

Prodicus, 14, 58

Rome, Cynicism in, 117-21,
128-41, 143, 154-6, 188,
190, 196

Sallustius, 207 ff.

Seneca, 125, 129

Sinope, currency of, 21, 54, 55

Socrates, 8 ff., 11-13, 15, 22, 27,

28, 64, 97, 215
Sostratus, 182
Sotades, 114
Sotion, 4

Sparta, 33, 34, 87, 88
Sphaerus, of Bosporus, 82, 93 f.
Stilpo, of Megara, 37, 57, 96
Stoicism, and Cynicism, 2, 4, 25,

69, 99~i03, 120, 187-99

Tatian, 174, 178
Teles, 45-8, 4 9, 84-7
Theagenes, 177, 183
Theodorus, of Cyrene, 63, 65,

104-7

Theognis, 112

Theophrastus, 3, 19, 24, 47, 52, 92
Thrasea Paetus, 128 ff.
Timon, of Phlius, 107, 108
Trajan, i54f.

Varro, 115, 119, 120
Vespasian, 133 f.

Xenocrates, 47, 89, 90
Xenophon, 8, 10, 15, 50, no

Zeno, of Citieum, 3, 4, 96-9, 101
108, 109

Printed in Great Britain by Butler & Tanner Ltd., Fromc and London